In the
article "With
'Spygate,' Trump Shows How He Uses Conspiracy Thories to Erode Trust,"
the NYT actually strengthens Trump's claims and undermines its own
credibility. The article seems to
emphasize the difference between a "spy" and an
"informant." To most people,
including me, this is not an important distinction. In fact most descriptions of Halper's
activities by the liberal press (NYT), claim that he was investigating Russia's
activities (spying on a foreign power), not the Trump campaign (informing on
political activities). Thus, from the
liberal viewpoint there is more justification for calling him a spy that from
the conservative viewpoint.
So far,
press reports have not made clear what Halper was doing. There was a big
meeting between the administration and Congressional representatives to discuss
what he was doing. The Democrats
objected to Trump's lawyer's presence.
This objection seems inappropriate to me. The Democrats seem to be arguing that Trump
as a defendant against possible charges of treason has no right to hear the
charges against him. They seem to
believe the prosecution process should be some kind of star chamber persecution
process which blocks the participation of Trump's lawyers. To me, this makes the liberal Democrats look
more authoritarian than Trump. They give
credence to Trump's claim of a "witch hunt," just as the NYT article
justifies his claims of a "spygate."
If the
liberals was to accuse Trump of bad conduct, they have to behave themselves
better than he does. Labeling this
article "news analysis" does not prevent it from being pure tabloid
mud-slinging that plays loose with the facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment