delta1 wrote:Sorry tail, I should have been more specific in my rant...I was referring to your dismissal of the "Russian thingy". Only a diehard would say that we should move on, there's nothing to see here...
It's not like-minded fervor (OK, maybe protective and patriotic fervor) to want to get to the truth about another country's interference in our democratic process.
If Hillary or Obama were in the same predicament that Trump is in, can you honestly say your reaction would be "there is nothing there"?
Thanks for the clarification.
And I would agree in principle. BUT...
I just see a situation where the "evidence" was stronger at the very beginning, which is the opposite of what happens when something is true.
What specifically are we even talking about?
How did Russia influence the election and how is it tied to Trump?
It's like we're looking for "something", and we'll figure out what it is later.
And if we're talking about leaks (only), then I don't even think it's a big deal. Because partisan sentiment is more angry at the leak than they are for the info leaked.
Basically, I think we're at the point where the (mainstream) media has pounded the "Russian" connection so hard that everybody thinks that "something" must have happened, and it must have been bad, and Trump is in cahoots.