To the Editor,
The arch conservative columnist, citing the Durham investigation as proof positive, this week absolved the 45th president of colluding with the Russians in a vain attempt to retain his office. There are numerous problems with this line of “reasoning.”
First a little history. The Durham investigation was initiated at the behest of the twice impeached president who instructed his ever loyal henchman, Attorney General William Barr, to investigate the investigators — the folks who were looking into the relationship between the Trump campaign and the Russians. After more than two and a half years of effort and expending nearly $4 million in taxpayer money, the Durham investigators were unable to discover a “smoking gun” that would prove misconduct on the part of those who looked into the Trump-Russian collusion. The main problem Durham and company faced was that there was no misconduct to discover.
Facts have never dissuaded the ideologue from abandoning his biases as he resorted to a standard conservative trope, the prejudices of the media. Oh, and the Democrats and Clinton have divided the country, not Trump, his refusal to accept the will of the people and his encouragement of the insurrectionists who sought to overthrow the government. Yeah, sure Frank, it’s the Democrats fault.
In a truly astounding demonstration of chutzpah, the columnist maintains that Trump and his cronies accomplished much despite the distraction caused by investigating Trump’s collusion. Tellingly, these alleged accomplishments are not cataloged.
I agree with the writer when he states, “There is a role for morality in politics.” This bit of sanity is followed, however, by another conservative talking point, a truly bizarre idea that assails the public school system as immoral. Somehow teachers are purported to find the time to inculcate their impressionable students with a leftist agenda. How do they do it Frank, do they secretly implant chips into the brains of the youngsters? Once again, I encourage readers to view the positions espoused by the columnist with a large dose of skepticism.