Great article but for one thing which sorely disappoints me. That you present Russiagate as fact. This, in an article where you speak of verification as opposed to opinion.

To date there has been absolutely no proof presented regarding Russian interference beyond what amounts to a few trolls trying to make money. In which, when presented in US federal court, Mueller’s team tried to refuse discovery of evidence. Unsurprisingly, the case basically disappeared from the radar after the judge mandated discovery. Russiagate has been the instrument of the DNC, Hillary Clinton and the “intelligence” apparatus, still including James Clapper, who is now the head of the “Committee to Investigate Russia”. Endorsed by he and multiple other voices (Mueller included) who gave us “high confidence” as well that Iraq had WMD’s. There was just as much evidence in Iraq and Iraq remains less dangerous.

Yes, we all must demand verifiable facts, not opinions. In the case of something like this, if it involves increasing the risk of warfare and demands tens of billions in spending, then if we are expected to believe it that much, we should be trusted with the information placing us at risk and expense. That’s reasonable. Especially when talking about an election that is more than 2 years in the past. Or what? Censorship? Because that has been the result.

I don’t want any corporation or government agency telling me who I can or cannot trust. Give me the evidence with sources and I will decide for myself. For rational people, pedagogy will not work. I’ve seen how well corporations and our government can be trusted.

Written by

Issues unite, names divide

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store