Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Left’s Presumption of Their Own Bias
As time passed, and months and years went by, it became increasingly obvious that Mueller had found no collusion. And it seemed obvious from the beginning that there would be no collusion, because why on earth would the Russians want Trump in the White House when they could have had Hillary Clinton? But despite the lack of evidence, progressives really believed that there would be collusion discovered. Somehow.
This tweet is from a year ago, so I suppose it may not be fair to bring it up a year later. But what the heck was this guy thinking? How could he be so confident? He wrote this last April, a year after the investigation started. Wasn’t he starting to wonder by then?
At that time, there was no evidence of any wrongdoing on Trump’s behalf. And after the release of the report a year later, there still isn’t.
With no evidence to support his opinion, how could he be so sure that he was right? He couldn’t be. Unless he presumed that the overwhelming bias of Mueller and his hand-selected team of Democrat activists would lead them to follow the law just like liberal Supreme Court justices follow the Constitution.
The only explanation I can come up with for the certainty of the left on the eventual findings of Mueller’s team was the presumption of their own bias and disregard for the law.
And that says a lot more about the left than it does about Trump.
Published in General
Yes, Mueller and crew knew by last summer there would be no indictments. That’s why they needed to keep the investigation alive beyond November 2018 in order for it to remain front and center for the public and for the media and Dems to keep it as a story.
So it is time for payback in 2020. Bigly!
And for what it’s worth over at National Review (yes I still read them and still value their opinion):
“It always seemed unlikely, if not outright preposterous, that the Russians would have entrusted a sensitive intelligence operation to the most shambolic general-election campaign in modern memory. There was no reason to collude with the Trump campaign, in any case — the Russians obviously hacked Democrats’ emails, on their own, and then released them via their WikiLeaks cutout, on their own.”
It was the total lack of logic that has defined this whole episode, which should tell you something: it was never about the truth (where logic would have reigned) but about the end result(where anything goes is the strategy).
“He must be guilty of collusion, he must. Because I hate him so much!”
The left really cannot help themselves. Facts will rarely get in the way of confirmation bias. They so desperately wanted the special counsel to find evidence of collusion, that Lee completely rejected any contrary evidence and completely absorbed any and all information that appeared to them to be positive evidence of collusion.
Sadly, this is part of the human condition. We all do it. Confirmation bias is extraordinarily difficult to overcome.
Now, the Mueller report (technically, the summary of it) must be rejected because of cognitive dissonance. All, they acknowledge that the report is been filed and that it disagrees with their preconceptions, but that will never be enough to change their minds.
We can jeer at them all we want (and they may deserve it this time). But sometimes the shoe is on the other foot regarding some other issue about which we care passionately. (The non-prosecution of Hillary Clinton, maybe.)
By no means does my previous comment excuse the mainstream media behavior in this matter. They are supposedly professionals. Instead, they abandoned all pretense of compliance with well-established journalistic standards. Despicable.
I am convinced there is a secret provision in the Constitution which forbids the prosecution of individuals with the last name of Clinton of any crime ever.
Chelsea 2024!
Senator Lindsey Graham wants to probe Obama-era controversies.
No. Bad example. As someone who once had a clearance, I can state unequivocally that, especially as a department head, Hillary’s behavior on this matter was felonious. Not just the mishandling (about which she absolutely knew better — she was responsible for supervising a whole freaking agency of the government on properly handling classified information!), but the subsequent cover-up and obstruction of justice (items under subpoena destroyed). Any other American who had come close to this malfeasance and corruption would be in jail right now. No question.
And as someone who has frequently established secure networks, I can say that there is no question that everyone involved had to have known how felonious it was.
Given that Trump did in fact win Pennsylvania, I’m not sure the moral of that story is what you think it is.
Don’t get me wrong. I favor locking her up ASAP over it.