Kill The Messenger!

I have not called myself a liberal since Hubert Humphrey supported the war in Vietnam. Also too many liberals pride themselves most on following correct procedure and obeying the law. Procedure is more important to them than an outcome. (This can also be true of some conservatives.)  For them, correct procedure is more important than, say, sneaking a paper off the President’s desk that might launch a nuclear war, which someone in the White House resistance actually did. He may have prevented a genocide, but can the semi-elected President trust him? That’s what counts for procedural liberals like Chris Hayes, who need to get a pair. 

Consider the uproar over the anonymous messenger who published a letter in the TIMES today. A White House big shot, he revealed that cabinet members have considered starting the Constitutional process that would remove an idiotic President from office. I’ve been watching the liberal talking heads on TV react to this. They’ve been denouncing the leaker, indignantly whining about his not having given his name. The messenger, they tell us, this new Deep Throat, is himself deeply immoral, for not publishing his name. He’s self-seeking. Kill the messenger. 

Let’s say that Anonymous gives his name. Trump has already labeled him a traitor. Nunes will call Anonymous to a hearing and ask for the names of the White House resistance. Anonymous will refuse to give names, be cited for contempt of congress and go to prison. The procedural types will be satisfied. Anonymous will dream of Edward Snowden.

But people like Mark Felt and Anonymous are not stupid. They prefer not to go to jail. They understand that at times rules should be broken. People are fallible. The rules people make aren’t always appropriate. 

My sense of how best to attack Trump is any way possible, including anonymously. Attack him from the front, back, both sides, the top and the bottom. Defend us.