Far too many political analysts (on TV and online) are so locked into the mindset that they’re only doing their job if they’re lamenting about doomsday scenarios, they don’t know what to do with good news when it happens. For instance, these public hearings are making pretty clear that there’s overwhelming evidence of Donald Trump’s guilt. Accordingly, most analysts are now saying this is putting “pressure” on Attorney General Merrick Garland to indict Trump, and that we’re all doomed if Garland doesn’t do it.
There are a number of fundamentally wrong things with this line of thinking. First, these hearings are clearly good news, so why try to frame them within a doomsday context? Let’s at least save the defeatist lamenting for actual bad news, not good news.
Second, it falsely presumes that Garland doesn’t want to indict Trump – a fictional narrative that’s based on nothing more than the media’s own ratings driven fictional portrayal of Garland as some kind of timid dotard.
In reality these hearings aren’t putting “pressure” on Merrick Garland. He’s got to be loving this. With this much overwhelming evidence, he was obviously going to indict Trump anyway. But these hearings are ensuring that Garland will have the benefit of a public mandate when he does indict, which will make the whole thing a lot easier.
It’s now well past time for us all to cease with the doomsday narratives about what will happen if the DOJ doesn’t indict Trump, and it’s time for us all to instead start putting winning momentum behind the narrative that the DOJ should and will indict Trump. That’s how we get even more people on board with it – not by reaching further and further to try to spin good news into doomsday hysteria.
Bill Palmer is the publisher of the political news outlet Palmer Report