The Wonderful World of Gaslighting
By Howard Roark
As the Dems edge ever closer to their self-inflicted date with Armageddon on November 8, it’s not surprising that the drumbeat for seedy Merrick Garland to indict Donald Trump grows louder by the day. I hope he has the courage to actually do it, because it would be destined to end like all Democrat schemes and lies — humiliation and more independents voting Republican.
Even in commie DC it would be a huge stretch to find Trump guilty on the frivolous charge of inciting an insurrection. The two brightest Democrat legal minds in the country, Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley, have been unequivocal on this issue.
Dershowitz says that “[Trump] didn’t incite, he invited. He said please walk there, I urge you. Do it peacefully and do it patriotically. That’s not incitement under the Supreme Court precedents, and that’s not incitement from a commonsense point of view. There’s a big difference between inciting and inviting, and what he did was invite, not incite.”
Turley put it even more succinctly by saying, “You can’t have an insurrection without anyone insurrecting.” Trespassing and disorderly conduct do not constitute an insurrection. Nor does presumptuously guessing that someone was thinking of insurrecting. You can’t read someone’s mind, and, even if you could, thinking something is not a crime.
Whether it is sloppy word choices resulting from hatred and anger or the recasting of events through out-and-out lying, Democrats deal in this kind of nonsense 24/7, 365 days a year. It’s often referred to as “gaslighting.”
You know how it goes — Afghanistan was a spectacularly successful withdrawal … the southern border is closed … inflation is just a high-class problem … if you get vaccinated, you won’t get COVID … a recession is not two straight quarters of negative growth after all … blah, blah, blah. The childish but brazen lies go on … and on … and on.
Democrats are especially adept at word manipulation when it comes to legislation. The easiest way to understand a Democrat bill is to flip it on its head, because almost without fail its purpose is to do the exact opposite of what its title states.
As an example, one of my favorites is the “For the People Act.” It’s a bill that purports to make it easier to vote in federal elections, but what it would actually do is make it easier to cheat and therefore increase the Democrats’ chance of winning every election. A more appropriate name would therefore be “For the Democrats Act.”
The same kind of gaslighting even saturates the photo ops that Dems never tire of staging, like Biden’s fraudulent Oval Office, Kamala telling fairy tales to paid child actors, and senile Joe pretending to work at his desk while bravely fighting off COVID. None of it is real.
Reasonably well-informed, rational people realize this, but they are not the ones being targeted. The Dem focus is always on the terminally ignorant, because they act on emotion and are therefore easy to manipulate. That said, ignorance doesn’t disqualify someone from jury duty, so I guess anything is possible if the impeachment crowd succeeds in getting uber-corrupt Merrick Garland to take the plunge.