Conspiracy Theories and Flawed Journalism

 

In case you haven’t been paying attention, Donald Trump has once again stirred up a hornet’s nest with one of his tweets, this time concerning the death of Lori Klausutis, an employee of then-Congressman Joe Scarborough. The story in a nutshell is that Klausutis, an otherwise fit young woman of 28, died in Scarborough’s Fort Walton Beach office from a head injury she sustained when passing out due to an undiagnosed heart condition. It has been a favorite topic among conspiracy theorists for almost 20 years.

The medical examiner’s report should have been the end of it. After all, the outcome of the autopsy was perfectly reasonable. But then several things got in the way. One, the medical examiner that made the ruling turned out to be a bit of a crackpot, arrested a decade later for illegally keeping stolen body parts in a South Florida storage facility. Secondly, Scarborough himself hasn’t helped. Here he is joking about the incident on Don Imus’ nationally syndicated radio show while pushing the launch of a show on MSNBC:

That was in 2003. Laughter is a strange reaction from someone who said it was outrageous rumors that caused him to resign his seat in Congress.

The reactions to Trump’s tweet has been predictable enough. But like so many of the other outrages of the Trump era, the anger is either misplaced or counterproductive. Like the political class that wishes to ignore their own complicity in Trump’s rise to the Oval Office, likewise the press wishes to ignore their own complicity in making the truth a rare commodity in the so-called “age of information.” If you spend three years rumor-mongering about Russia collusion theories and the backgrounds of Supreme Court nominees it’s difficult to take your objections to the President’s tweets seriously. In the end the reality of your headline is “Noted Victim of Conspiracy Theories Shares His Own Conspiracy Theories.”

Someone on Twitter framed the situation thusly: There is no difference between a “conspiracy theory” and “fake news.” That, of course, is nonsense. Conspiracy theories are partly based on the experience that the application of the law is too often double-tiered, with one set of rules for ordinary citizens and another for the well-connected. This is universal. Those on the right see privilege born of political power, those on the left see it as being the result of wealth and race.

In that regard, most conspiracy theories are organic, born of curiosity and mistrust, and perpetuated because the ordinary citizen doesn’t have the resources to disprove them. That makes “fake news” ten times worse. It’s not amateur bumbling, it’s professional malpractice. They have the resources and the skill but lack the motivation and therefore the effort to provide the most truthful reporting possible.

All good reporters and the best stories begin with theories and the simple question, “What if…” It’s the ability to follow through and the willingness to be convinced that dead ends aren’t wasted that makes a good journalist.

But there is also a basic flaw in journalism that needs to be addressed: the two source rule. In an era where elements of the Federal Government are actively trying to undermine and overturn the results of elections the standard for printing or broadcasting, an item needs to be higher than that. As the folks at Fusion GPS demonstrated, finding two or more people to tell the same lie in order to get that lie into the papers and on-air is an awfully easy thing to accomplish.

Fundamentally, a functioning press would be able to able to throttle conspiracy theories without breaking a sweat. But that takes trust from the public-at-large, something that the profession of journalism has willingly abandoned in the pursuance of political goals.

Published in Journalism

Comments are closed on this post.

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 146 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    MichaelKennedy (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Death): It was a garbage tweet from the President of the United States. He demeaned himself. No need to construct elaborate analyses to try to rationalize it.

    This is exactly the attitude that will eventually kill the conservative cause: self-righteousness in lieu of self-reflection. You see it in politicians and pundits alike – the idea that everything that happens does so in a vacuum – that whatever relates to Trump is 100% independent of political events and that all analysis that reflects poorly on anyone else’s actions can be dismissed as “rationalization.” Well, the world doesn’t operate that way.

    Past performance by the GOP led to Trump’s rise. The “resistance” movement in the government and the media contributes to his behavior in office.

    No, what you are doing is ridiculous, believing you have to jump to rationalize everything Trump does. I’m voting for the President and trying to persuade others to do so, but trying to do so by defending the stupid things he does just makes you sound silly. No one who is not already on the Trump train is going to be persuaded by this nonsense.

    Heavy TDS there, big fella.

    If you bother to read, you will see I am a Trump supporter.  But I refuse to be a cult member unlike you.

    As for being a Jacksonian, I like that about him.  But I don’t like when Jacksonians are stupid.

    • #31
  2. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Death): It was a garbage tweet from the President of the United States. He demeaned himself. No need to construct elaborate analyses to try to rationalize it.

    This is exactly the attitude that will eventually kill the conservative cause: self-righteousness in lieu of self-reflection. You see it in politicians and pundits alike – the idea that everything that happens does so in a vacuum – that whatever relates to Trump is 100% independent of political events and that all analysis that reflects poorly on anyone else’s actions can be dismissed as “rationalization.” Well, the world doesn’t operate that way.

    Past performance by the GOP led to Trump’s rise. The “resistance” movement in the government and the media contributes to his behavior in office.

    No, what you are doing is ridiculous, believing you have to jump to rationalize everything Trump does. I’m voting for the President and trying to persuade others to do so, but trying to do so by defending the stupid things he does just makes you sound silly. No one who is not already on the Trump train is going to be persuaded by this nonsense.

    This is mind-reading. 

    And this is not a game of persuasion. EJ, I suspect, is merely pointing out that Trump is responding in kind. He’s playing dirty too. It’s not a defense of his character, it’s a description of his approach.

    His observation is useful. Your observation, that Trump should not descend to this level, has been made thousands of times and is not really relevant. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. We are witnessing a street-fight. We as color commentators can judge character if we want, but what matters is the result. No one’s going to be swayed by Trump taking the high ground either, and he might lose doing so. Trump, probably more than anyone on the planet, know he will never be accepted as a decent human being by these people. To me this is the biggest moral failing of all, people who won’t give someone a second chance. It’s fundamentally unChristian. And when I see people moralize about Trump, giving absolutely zero benefit of the doubt, I am seeing rank hypocrisy on parade.

     

     

    • #32
  3. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark: No, what you are doing is ridiculous, believing you have to jump to rationalize everything Trump does.

    This, too, is a unique feature of the Trump Era. A good 90% of the original post is devoted to the nature of conspiracy theories and why the failures of modern journalism renders them impotent to combating them and all you see is an apologist. Again, these are blinders that people willingly put on, that all analysis or opinion must somehow be defined through the prism of Trump’s actions instead of being able to use them merely as jumping off point for larger discussions.

    We bifurcate here irreconcilably.

    Oh, what great and original insight, telling us something we all already know and have beaten to death on Ricochet.  The only reason to write this and tying it to that tweet is to “contextualize” it like a progressive college professor. 

    • #33
  4. thelonious Member
    thelonious
    @thelonious

    Franco (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Death): It was a garbage tweet from the President of the United States. He demeaned himself. No need to construct elaborate analyses to try to rationalize it.

    This is exactly the attitude that will eventually kill the conservative cause: self-righteousness in lieu of self-reflection. You see it in politicians and pundits alike – the idea that everything that happens does so in a vacuum – that whatever relates to Trump is 100% independent of political events and that all analysis that reflects poorly on anyone else’s actions can be dismissed as “rationalization.” Well, the world doesn’t operate that way.

    Past performance by the GOP led to Trump’s rise. The “resistance” movement in the government and the media contributes to his behavior in office.

    No, what you are doing is ridiculous, believing you have to jump to rationalize everything Trump does. I’m voting for the President and trying to persuade others to do so, but trying to do so by defending the stupid things he does just makes you sound silly. No one who is not already on the Trump train is going to be persuaded by this nonsense.

    This is mind-reading.

    And this is not a game of persuasion. EJ, I suspect, is merely pointing out that Trump is responding in kind. He’s playing dirty too. It’s not a defense of his character, it’s a description of his approach.

    His observation is useful. Your observation, that Trump should not descend to this level, has been made thousands of times and is not really relevant. You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. We are witnessing a street-fight. We as color commentators can judge character if we want, but what matters is the result. No one’s going to be swayed by Trump taking the high ground either, and he might lose doing so. Trump, probably more than anyone on the planet, know he will never be accepted as a decent human being by these people. To me this is the biggest moral failing of all, people who won’t give someone a second chance. It’s fundamentally unChristian. And when I see people moralize about Trump, giving absolutely zero benefit of the doubt, I am seeing rank hypocrisy on parade.

     

     

    Throwing out idiotic conspiracy theories on one of your 2 bit rivals is a dumb way to fight. Trump has no strategy of how to fight his real enemies. He only goes by his impulsive instincts with no thought to its efficacy. He doesn’t have a grand plan he’s just an impulsive jerk to his own sorry detriment. It’s too bad. He has real enemies trying to undermine him.

    • #34
  5. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    I never know what to think about tweets like this from the President.

    On the one hand, it’s ridiculous and outrageous to make unsubstantiated allegations of this type.  On the other hand, its exactly what the media does all of the time, including to the President.  So it serves to focus attention on the unscrupulous tactics of the media itself.

    The media accuses the President of spreading deranged conspiracy theories — which is exactly what the media does all of the time.

    • #35
  6. katievs Inactive
    katievs
    @katievs

    Mark Hemingway weighs in. Like me, he couldn’t vote for Trump last time. He was too worried about the damage his bad character could do to the body politic. These recent tweets are exactly the kind of thing he’d dreaded. But, having said that, he goes on to excoriate the horrendous media double standard that has proven far more destructive to the common good than Trump’s worst bad behavior.

    Beyond the damage these tweets are doing to this poor deceased woman’s family, are Trump supporters supposed to be outraged that the president is trafficking in a conspiracy theory? Trump-Russia dominated the news for years, the story was largely social media-driven, and the premise behind it was, by the way, completely wrong and rife with obvious factual problems from the outset. Just because the media establishment credulously marched in lockstep, that doesn’t make their reporting on the dominant news story of Trump’s presidency any less of a conspiracy theory. It enabled lawbreaking, dramatically undermined public trust in media and law enforcement, and destroyed lives in the process.

    He goes further than I’m willing to go at the moment in assuming that the tweets were vicious and immoral. But I agree with his conclusion:

    Trump merely exposed existing contradictions, where the decorum and civility of official Washington had already become fig leaves for wielding power in a way that ran roughshod over the desires of “deplorable” and “irredeemable” citizens. Until we all change our own behavior and treat each other with respect regardless of our disagreements, we’re going to continue to get the nasty discourse we deserve, regardless of who’s president or how much the media feels entitled to complain about their rhetoric.

    • #36
  7. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    thelonious (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    eath): It was a garbage tweet from the President of the United States. He demeaned himself. No need to construct elaborate analyses to try to rationalize it.

    This is exactly the attitude that will eventually kill the conservative cause: self-righteousness in lieu of self-reflection. You see it in politicians and pundits alike – thependent dism

    Throwing out idiotic conspiracy theories on one of your 2 bit rivals is a dumb way to fight. Trump has no strategy of how to fight his real enemies. He only goes by his impulsive instincts with no thought to its efficacy. He doesn’t have a grand plan he’s just an impulsive jerk to his own sorry detriment. It’s too bad. He has real enemies trying to undermine him.

    Maybe, but maybe not. As many have said here in different ways, these tactics turn out well for Trump in unpredictable ways often enough that it might be prudent to consider there is a grand plan, even if that plan is carpet-bombing and the propaganda win is an errant bomb hitting a school, nevertheless the enemy must retreat.

    I play chess ( 2D is enough for me) and when your opponent makes an odd move, it’s good advice to try to figure he/she has a plan and what might it be, bad advice to simply consider it a wasted move or a blunder.
    In this battle, Trump is doing something clearly “wrong” and again, you might be right that it’s unnecessary and stupid.
    However are any minds going to change? No. Will Trump’s enemies be more reluctant to attack him relentlessly without possible consequence or embarrassment? Yes, I think so.
    On another level, this sets up perfectly the fact that conspiracy theories are being thrown around by the media every day. It highlights that fact.

    As to the damage caused to the family by dredging up this forgotten chapter, it’s the best argument they have. Good point.

    But watch. Biden is on record many times blaming a truck driver who “drank his lunch” for the accident that took his son’s life. This report is completely false. Biden’s son was at fault and the driver had no alcohol that fateful day. The truck driver was horrified at the accident and wasn’t to blame, yet Joe Biden slandered him to make his tragic story sound even more sympathetic.

    Trump has a way of dragging the media into moral pronouncements about him that apply perfectly –  often even more aptly,  to things they themselves are doing or the politicians they support.

    In effect, Trump has already been thoroughly demonized. He can’t be worse. All that’s left is to expose them. In game theory, Trump has no downside left, so it’s always to his advantage to play this game.

    • #37
  8. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Franco (View Comment): Biden is on record many times blaming a truck driver who “drank his lunch” for the accident that took his son’s life.

    Wife, I think.

    • #38
  9. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    philo (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment): Biden is on record many times blaming a truck driver who “drank his lunch” for the accident that took his son’s life.

    Wife, I think.

    His wife was driving with children, I think, and was killed along with one son.  She was at fault.

    • #39
  10. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Franco (View Comment):
    In effect, Trump has already been thoroughly demonized. He can’t be worse. All that’s left is to expose them. In game theory, Trump has no downside left, so it’s always to his advantage to play this game.

    Even better (I argue), with respect to his supporters, he is politically anti-fragile.

    • #40
  11. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    katievs (View Comment):

    Mark Hemingway weighs in. Like me, he couldn’t vote for Trump last time. He was too worried about the damage his bad character could do to the body politic. These recent tweets are exactly the kind of thing he’d dreaded. But, having said that, he goes on to excoriate the horrendous media double standard that has proven far more destructive to the common good than Trump’s worst bad behavior.

    Beyond the damage these tweets are doing to this poor deceased woman’s family, are Trump supporters supposed to be outraged that the president is trafficking in a conspiracy theory? Trump-Russia dominated the news for years, the story was largely social media-driven, and the premise behind it was, by the way, completely wrong and rife with obvious factual problems from the outset. Just because the media establishment credulously marched in lockstep, that doesn’t make their reporting on the dominant news story of Trump’s presidency any less of a conspiracy theory. It enabled lawbreaking, dramatically undermined public trust in media and law enforcement, and destroyed lives in the process.

    He goes further than I’m willing to go at the moment in assuming that the tweets were vicious and immoral. But I agree with his conclusion:

    Trump merely exposed existing contradictions, where the decorum and civility of official Washington had already become fig leaves for wielding power in a way that ran roughshod over the desires of “deplorable” and “irredeemable” citizens. Until we all change our own behavior and treat each other with respect regardless of our disagreements, we’re going to continue to get the nasty discourse we deserve, regardless of who’s president or how much the media feels entitled to complain about their rhetoric.

    Katie, I think we’re on the same page about this, but I have a question about the quote from Hemingway.

    What damage is being done to the deceased woman’s family?  I may not know everything about the situation, though I’ve read the letter from her widowed husband (here), and I don’t see any negative allegations against her.  The President’s insinuation is that Scarborough may have been involved in her death.

    If there was a claim that she had an affair with Scarborough, or something like that, I could see how it could be harming her family.  I don’t see any significant harm to her reputation here.  Am I missing something?

    If I’m right, then there’s something else going on.  There strange media narrative about the President supposedly harming the reputation of the deceased, which he does not appear to be doing.

    • #41
  12. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    katievs (View Comment):

    Mark Hemingway weighs in. Like me, he couldn’t vote for Trump last time. He was too worried about the damage his bad character could do to the body politic. These recent tweets are exactly the kind of thing he’d dreaded. But, having said that, he goes on to excoriate the horrendous media double standard that has proven far more destructive to the common good than Trump’s worst bad behavior.

    Beyond the damage these tweets are doing to this poor deceased woman’s family, are Trump supporters supposed to be outraged that the president is trafficking in a conspiracy theory? Trump-Russia dominated the news for years, the story was largely social media-driven, and the premise behind it was, by the way, completely wrong and rife with obvious factual problems from the outset. Just because the media establishment credulously marched in lockstep, that doesn’t make their reporting on the dominant news story of Trump’s presidency any less of a conspiracy theory. It enabled lawbreaking, dramatically undermined public trust in media and law enforcement, and destroyed lives in the process.

    He goes further than I’m willing to go at the moment in assuming that the tweets were vicious and immoral. But I agree with his conclusion:

    Trump merely exposed existing contradictions, where the decorum and civility of official Washington had already become fig leaves for wielding power in a way that ran roughshod over the desires of “deplorable” and “irredeemable” citizens. Until we all change our own behavior and treat each other with respect regardless of our disagreements, we’re going to continue to get the nasty discourse we deserve, regardless of who’s president or how much the media feels entitled to complain about their rhetoric.

    Katie, I think we’re on the same page about this, but I have a question about the quote from Hemingway.

    What damage is being done to the deceased woman’s family? I may not know everything about the situation, though I’ve read the letter from her widowed husband (here), and I don’t see any negative allegations against her. The President’s insinuation is that Scarborough may have been involved in her death.

    If there was a claim that she had an affair with Scarborough, or something like that, I could see how it could be harming her family. I don’t see any significant harm to her reputation here. Am I missing something?

    If I’m right, then there’s something else going on. There strange media narrative about the President supposedly harming the reputation of the deceased, which he does not appear to be doing.

    Looking further, I did find a tweet from the President asking whether there might have been an affair.  It was not mentioned in the widower’s letter.

    • #42
  13. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio…
    @ArizonaPatriot

    So I got a bit obsessed about this story, and looked for more information.  It turns out that Michael Moore apparently accused Scarborough of murder in connection with this staffer’s death (per this 2004 Daily Kos article), and it was a Left-wing theory outlined in the Daily Kos in a detailed story in 2011, here.

    So it turns out that this is Left-wing fake news, if fake it is.  The death certainly seems very odd and suspicious.

    • #43
  14. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment): The death certainly seems very odd and suspicious.

    I don’t know many of the details but this part from Da Tech Guy almost made me giggle:

    Scarborough, who was 900 miles away in Washington, D.C., on the day Klausutis died…

    That adds about as much confidence to the story as Susan Rice telling herself multiple times that Obama told the gang that he wanted everything done “by the book.” Of course he did. (I know, Joe was probably 900 miles away 85% of the time in the normal course of being a congressman but…no doubt he would be damn sure to be that far away if he wanted an ironclad alibi.)

    • #44
  15. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I am shocked that no one has addressed the true victim in this case, the Timothy J. Klausutis.  Here is a copy of his letter to Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter, Inc.  (This letter was published in the New York Times, therefore it is in the public realm and copyright does not apply to it)

    “Mr. Dorsey:

    “Nearly 19 years ago, my wife, who had an undiagnosed heart condition, fell and hit her head on her desk at work. She was found dead the next morning. Her name is Lori Kaye Klausutis and she was 28 years old when she died. Her passing is the single most painful thing that I have ever had to deal with in my 52 years and continues to haunt her parents and sister.

    “I have mourned my wife every day since her passing. I have tried to honor her memory and our marriage. As her husband, I feel that one of my marital obligations is to protect her memory as I would have protected her in life. There has been a constant barrage of falsehoods, half-truths, innuendo and conspiracy theories since the day she died. I realize that may sound like an exaggeration, unfortunately it is the verifiable truth. Because of this, I have struggled to move forward with my life.

    “The frequency, intensity, ugliness, and promulgation of these horrifying lies ever increases on the internet. These conspiracy theorists, including most recently the President of the United States, continue to spread their bile and misinformation on your platform disparaging the memory of my wife and our marriage. President Trump on Tuesday tweeted to his nearly 80 million followers alluding to the repeatedly debunked falsehood that my wife was murdered by her boss, former U.S. Rep. Joe Scarborough. The son of the president followed and more directly attacked my wife by tweeting to his followers as the means of spreading this vicious lie.

    “I’m sure you are aware of this situation because media around the world have covered it, but just in case, here it is:

    [Two tweets by Trump and one by DJTJ.]

    “My request is simple: Please delete these tweets.

    “I’m a research engineer and not a lawyer, but I’ve reviewed all of Twitter’s rules and terms of service. The President’s tweet that suggests that Lori was murdered — without evidence (and contrary to the official autopsy) — is a violation of Twitter’s community rules and terms of service. An ordinary user like me would be banished from the platform for such a tweet but I am only asking that these tweets be removed.

    “I am now angry as well as frustrated and grieved. I understand that Twitter’s policies about content are designed to maintain the appearance that your hands are clean you provide the platform and the rest is up to users. However, in certain past cases, Twitter has removed content and accounts that are inconsistent with your terms of service.

    “I’m asking you to intervene in this instance because the President of the United States has taken something that does not belong to him — the memory of my dead wife — and perverted it for perceived political gain. I would also ask that you consider Lori’s niece and two nephews who will eventually come across this filth in the future. They have never met their Aunt and it pains me to think they would ever have to “learn” about her this way.

    “My wife deserves better.

    “Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

    “Sincerely,

    “Timothy J. Klausutis, Ph.D.”

    • #45
  16. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I am embarrassed at the myriad attempts to justify Trump’s deplorable conduct in many of the proceeding comments.  I note that National Review addressed this issue and the concluding two paragraphs are most appropriate:

    “Trump is clearly driven by his desire to say the most malicious and painful things he can about Scarborough, to take revenge for the former congressman’s now obsessively anti-Trump morning program. The president maintains he doesn’t watch, although this is plainly untrue. The collateral damage is the family of Lori Klausutis, who had to endure her sudden loss and now watch helplessly as the president pushes a deception about her death for his own petty purposes.

    “It’s unworthy of a partisan blogger, let alone the president of the United States.”

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/trumps-grotesque-tweets/

    The Editors at National Review addressed this at length today.  Episode 221 was released a couple of hours ago.  The first 21 minutes address these tweets.  https://www.nationalreview.com/podcasts/the-editors/  Often in the past this podcast has also been published at Ricochet.  I hope that this one is.

    • #46
  17. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I think that it is helpful for my fellow Ricochetti to hear Joe Scarborough themselves about this issue.  (I have listened every morning for the last four years.)

    • #47
  18. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    In 2012 the Democrats accused the Republican nominee of murder and tax evasion. They didn’t fight back and lost a winnable election. The Senate Majority Leader boasted about it. That’s how you ended up with Trump because enough people got sick of taking it up the rear in the name of civility.

    Again, where we are today didn’t happen in a vacuum. But as long as people persist in believing that none of their own past actions got us here you’re going to continue to be part of the problem you say you deplore.

    • #48
  19. katievs Inactive
    katievs
    @katievs

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Katie, I think we’re on the same page about this, but I have a question about the quote from Hemingway.

    What damage is being done to the deceased woman’s family? I may not know everything about the situation, though I’ve read the letter from her widowed husband (here), and I don’t see any negative allegations against her. The President’s insinuation is that Scarborough may have been involved in her death.

    I think it’s about the pain and awfulness of her name and story being publicly dragged through the mud.  

    I sympathize with that. I’m sure I’d hate it too, if I were related to her.

    On the other hand, a lot depends on the truth of the matter. A lot depends, too, on what Trump really believes is the truth. If he’s just smearing someone who constantly smears him, then I do think that while Joe Scarborough may deserve it, the dead woman’s family doesn’t.  On the other hand, if it really WAS a case of foul play and cover up, then it may be right to bring it up, even if her family (not to mention Scarborough and other PTB) don’t want it brought up. And if Trump believes that drawing public attention to the case is the best (only?) way to get a real investigation, then maybe it’s not so terrible what he’s done.

    I suspect the truth of Trump’s motivation here is mixed, like most human motivations.

    • #49
  20. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I hope that no one will lecture me about Joe Biden, without addressing this terrible behavior by Trump.

    • #50
  21. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Gary Robbins: I think that it is helpful for my fellow Ricochetti to hear Joe Scarborough themselves about this issue. (I have listened every morning for the last four years.)

    Funny. There’s an audio clip above where you can hear Scarborough get a good laugh out of it. Was he thinking about the Klausutis family then?

    • #51
  22. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EJHill (View Comment):

    In 2012 the Democrats accused the Republican nominee of murder and tax evasion. They didn’t fight back and lost a winnable election. The Senate Majority Leader boasted about it. That’s how you ended up with Trump because enough people got sick of taking it up the rear in the name of civility.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will go down in history for outright lying on the floor of the Senate.  He was literally protected by the Constitution’s “speech and debate clause” which allows outright lies to be uttered on the floor of congress.  Why in the world Mitch McConnell did not get up and take on Harry Reid each and every time is beyond me.

    Again, where we are today didn’t happen in a vacuum. But as long as people persist in believing that none of their own past actions got us here you’re going to continue to be part of the problem you say you deplore.

    No.  Trump’s behavior must be denounced.  No more of this “well look at what they did” type of stuff.  The Honor Code at West Point has only 12 words:  “A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”   Trump is lying.  Are you going to tolerate him by pointing out the past evils of the Democrats?  Or will you stand up and say that what Trump did was wrong, and does not represent you, and that you denounce it.  To quote the Greatest President of the Twentieth Century from 1964, this is a time for choosing.

    • #52
  23. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    katievs (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Katie, I think we’re on the same page about this, but I have a question about the quote from Hemingway.

    What damage is being done to the deceased woman’s family? I may not know everything about the situation, though I’ve read the letter from her widowed husband (here), and I don’t see any negative allegations against her. The President’s insinuation is that Scarborough may have been involved in her death.

    I think it’s about the pain and awfulness of her name and story being publicly dragged through the mud.

    I sympathize with that. I’m sure I’d hate it too, if I were related to her.

    On the other hand, a lot depends on the truth of the matter. A lot depends, too, on what Trump really believes is the truth. If he’s just smearing someone who constantly smears him, then I do think that while Joe Scarborough may deserve it, the dead woman’s family doesn’t. On the other hand, if it really WAS a case of foul play and cover up, then it may be right to bring it up, even if her family (not to mention Scarborough and other PTB) don’t want it brought up. And if Trump believes that drawing public attention to the case is the best (only?) way to get a real investigation, then maybe it’s not so terrible what he’s done.

    I suspect the truth of Trump’s motivation here is mixed, like most human motivations.

    With all due respect, I don’t think that there is a molecule of evidence in support of Trump’s wild charge.  What is so difficult about saying that Trump was pure and simply wrong? 

    Also, I have watched Morning Joe for the last four years.  I have heard lots and lots of hard criticism, but never that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump with an untruth.  If you have evidence that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump, please produce it.  Otherwise please withdraw your allegation that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump. 

    • #53
  24. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins: I think that it is helpful for my fellow Ricochetti to hear Joe Scarborough themselves about this issue. (I have listened every morning for the last four years.)

    Funny. There’s an audio clip above where you can hear Scarborough get a good laugh out of it. Was he thinking about the Klausutis family then?

    I tried several times but could not open it.  Sorry.  People often said stupid things on Don Imus’ show. 

    • #54
  25. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Gary Robbins: Why in the world Mitch McConnell did not get up and take on Harry Reid each and every time is beyond me.

    Why? Because people like you insisted that we always turn the other cheek and never fight back. Again, that’s how you ended up with Trump.

    No more of this “well look at what they did” type of stuff. 

    Again, past unilateral disarmament on our half is how you got Trump. Until you realize it’s less about what the Democrats did and more about how Republicans like you reacted to it, you’ll get more Trumpism than you can humanly tolerate. You helped create Trump’s moment whether you like it or not.

    • #55
  26. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Gary Robbins: If you have evidence that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump, please produce it. Otherwise please withdraw your allegation that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump. 

    Gary, in November of 2017 Scarborough wrote an editorial for the Washington Post promising Mueller was about to prove Trump was a Russian asset. Accusing the President of being an agent of a foreign hostile power is within your boundaries of civility? If it is you have a strange definition of civility.

    • #56
  27. Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo… Coolidge
    Gumby Mark (R-Meth Lab of Demo…
    @GumbyMark

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins: If you have evidence that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump, please produce it. Otherwise please withdraw your allegation that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump.

    Gary, in November of 2017 Scarborough wrote an editorial for the Washington Post promising Mueller was about to prove Trump was a Russian asset. Accusing the President of being an agent of a foreign hostile power is within your boundaries of civility? If it is you have a strange definition of civility.

    Well EJ, I’m on your side on this part of the argument.

    • #57
  28. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins: Why in the world Mitch McConnell did not get up and take on Harry Reid each and every time is beyond me.

    Why? Because people like you insisted that we always turn the other cheek and never fight back. Again, that’s how you ended up with Trump.

    I did?  When?  And when did Reagan “turn the other cheek”?    

    No more of this “well look at what they did” type of stuff.

    Again, past unilateral disarmament on our half is how you got Trump. Until you realize it’s less about what the Democrats did and more about how Republicans like you reacted to it, you’ll get more Trumpism than you can humanly tolerate. You helped create Trump’s moment whether you like it or not.

    The West Point Honor Code is  “A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”  At this point, it appears that the entire Republican Party is tolerating Trump’s repeated behavior.  I will not be voting for them.  I hope to hammer a wooden stake through the heart of Trumpism.   

    • #58
  29. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins: If you have evidence that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump, please produce it. Otherwise please withdraw your allegation that Joe Scarborough has “smeared” Trump.

    Gary, in November of 2017 Scarborough wrote an editorial for the Washington Post promising Mueller was about to prove Trump was a Russian asset. Accusing the President of being an agent of a foreign hostile power is within your boundaries of civility? If it is you have a strange definition of civility.

    I think that you overstated the conclusion.  Here is the column.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-is-trump-so-obsessed-with-russia-were-finally-going-to-find-out/2017/11/02/8ba33bba-bff5-11e7-959c-fe2b598d8c00_story.html  There are 23 data points in the column.  Given those data points, one could legitimately come to that conclusion.

    • #59
  30. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    There are 23 data points in the column. Given those data points, one could legitimately come to that conclusion.

    Data points are neither evidence nor proof. All of these are in the same report that concluded there was no evidence of collusion between American citizens colluding with the Russian government on behalf of Trump. Scarborough was accusing without proof.   

    Meaningless data points, like the West Point honor code, are just crap you throw on the wall to see what sticks. 

    By the way, offering an explanation in how this stuff happens is NOT the same as excusing it. As I said in the original post the medical examiner’s report should have been the end of it. But your dislike for the President, and others like you, insist any analysis that doesn’t place 100% of the blame on Trump is the equivalent of being an apologist. That’s a narrative, not truth. 

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.

Comments are closed.