There is a hallucinatory quality to the verbiage surrounding Presidential misconduct that spews day and night from our news sources.
Talking heads simultaneously condemn and exonerate, clarify and obfuscate, accuse and excuse, praise and disparage, reveal and conceal while we, the general public, attempt to sort fact from fabrication.
What is the average citizen to make of the conflicting political narrative which confounds our desire for reliable information?
Who is the average citizen to accept as a source of unvarnished, untarnished information?
When our governmental leaders refute each other with dueling renditions of The (sworn)Truth, who is the average person to trust?
When fact finders compete with liars, when policy spinners tweak facts to suit personal ends, who is the average listener to credit?
When each pundit exhorts the other to “Do the Right Thing”, yet the word “right” itself has diametrically opposing versions, who is the average citizen to follow?
As armchair psychologists, we can speculate about competing motives. As amateur historians (if we are old enough), we can piece together enlightening parallels from the past.
As average citizens, we can attempt to distinguish political beneficiaries from unaffiliated truth-seekers. As parents and teachers, we can make sure our youngsters are paying attention as this historical melodrama unfolds.
As grandparents, we can hope we live long enough to see justice prevail.
Impeachment is an important step toward justice.