I care nothing about the kaleidoscopic Russian Picasso sketch the media has frantically painted around Trump. I wouldn’t even care much if it were all true. After all, Putin is entirely indifferent to the lives of me and my loved ones. Whereas the menagerie of the American left would prefer both were brief and miserable. The fact is nation doesn’t mean country–even when you hydraulically press a dozen of the former into one of the latter.
But, of course, Russia-Trump hasn’t been proved true at all in any meaningful sense. It is rather a ceaseless simulacrum of lib spy fantasies put to political purpose. All of which, we can recall, were originally breathed to life as a frivolous attempt to deflect the content of certain unsavory Podesta Emails.
As in most political theater, the plot disintegrates into camp the instant one puts its premise into everyday context. For instance, if your wife is ever provided lurid evidence of an ongoing affair, you should promptly explain that the true villain is whoever took the photos. Your own indiscretions being entirely incidental to any deserved outrage. Remember to look solemnly in her eyes when saying Honey, I pledge to find the culprit who hacked our marriage. I fear there may have even been collusion. As a favor to the blog, please provide a transcript of her response in the comments section.
Though camp or no, the intent of such ludicrous subterfuge is to render the populace insensible by sheer volume. Somewhat the way an ascetic can be rendered obese by a steady diet of McDonald’s french fries. And in comparison to the vast production of pulpy Ivan Trump hit pieces, McDonald’s fries are as uncommon as Faberge Eggs.
One of yesterday’s entries–which puts it approximately 700,000 anti-Trump articles earlier–was by a particularly gaga critic named Megan McArdle. The following excerpt captured her sense of pique.
Donald Trump is an American. He is an American who ran for office under a slogan of patriotic pride and love of country. People who love their country do not help rival powers intervene in their country’s elections, even if that intervention might have the lovely side effect of getting them elected. Countries gonna country, and spies gonna spy. But Americans running for American office must pick sides: the will of American voters or the influence of a foreign power. Hint: You choose your fellow Americans.
A decent person certainly would not contemplate and suggest timing of any document release — which moves this revelation beyond merely “taking a meeting you shouldn’t have” and into the territory of “a presidential campaign actively coordinating with foreign agents.”
Do you traitorous Trump-sucking imbeciles comprehend this clearly? When you run for office you must pick sides: the will of American voters or the influence of a foreign power. Hint: You choose your fellow Americans. Doing otherwise places one in the territory of actively coordinating with foreign agents. That’s treasonous, I’ll infer.
The implication of which makes me quite ambivalent about attending the shadowy and secretive AIPAC policy conference, March 4-6, 2018, in Washington DC (discount ends soon). I wonder how much of a strain on their conscience it is for American officials attending a function whose sole purpose is to influence their office on behalf of another country. Hint: You choose your fellow Americans. As McArdle notes, this is the territory of actively coordinating with foreign agents.
But I just stumbled upon this clandestine front for a meddling foreign power on the dark web. I assume none of our representatives even know it exists. So to aid the CIA in intelligence gathering, I was able to piece together highly damning evidence of collusion with US officials AIPAC had kept hidden on its about page. The press is going to go wild with this:
AIPAC’s staff and citizen activists educate decision makers about…how it is in America’s best interest to help ensure that the Jewish state is safe, strong and secure.
I imagine Putin would be too embarrassed to try painting his interests as America’s to people actually hired for the latter. I’m sure he’d suggest we have common interests, but saying it’s in your interests to advance mine is an appeal of the mafia, not officials of independent countries. Why would American decision-makers be interested in a foreign agent’s opinion of what’s best for them? Do the Boston Celtics ask the LA Lakers which African ectomorphs they should draft? They don’t because other people are working for their own interests rather than yours. Thus “America’s best interests” take on quite a different tone in the mouth of someone paid to advance the best interests of non-Americans.
So what happens with dual citizens and AIPAC-influenced officials when Israel’s interests do not align with Indiana’s? Hint: you don’t choose your fellow Americans.
As America’s bipartisan pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC urges all members of Congress to support Israel through foreign aid, government partnerships, joint anti-terrorism efforts and the promotion of a negotiated two-state solution—a Jewish state of Israel and a demilitarized Palestinian state.
You’re not going to achieve much more open collusion than that. These are agents of a foreign power plotting explicitly with US representatives to extract payments from the US Treasury while forming “partnerships” with their confederates. Russia has never attempted anything so audacious. In hindsight, that’s probably to its discredit.
Though the true stuff of horror titillation would be if Putin had developed a connected, funded, and serpentine network capable of sustained cultivation within its ranks. What if it wasn’t just the Trump family who were Russian stooges, but rather thousands of pawns and saboteurs in colleges and communities across the country agitating insistently on Moscow’s behalf? That would be cause for a national emergency and military mobilization, surely.
More than 100,000 citizens from across the country work with their elected officials and AIPAC staff to strengthen the bonds between the United States and the Jewish state.
AIPAC members in all 50 states are encouraged to be politically active and develop relationships with their members of Congress to help educate them about the importance of U.S.-Israel ties.
Beyond building support in Washington, AIPAC engages pro-Israel activists across the country through a vibrant network of 10 regional offices and seven satellite offices.
Pro-Israel activists from Missoula to Miami work hand-in-hand with AIPAC staff to improve the future and security of the United States and Israel.
A strong U.S.-Israel relationship is a cause that concerns a broad spectrum of Americans. As such, AIPAC professionals work with a wide range of communities to promote pro-Israel political activism nation-wide.
AIPAC is also working to foster the next generation of American pro-Israel leaders, by working on hundreds of college and high school campuses, empowering and educating student activists to answer Israel’s detractors and use political involvement to build support for Israel.
I suppose it’s too easy game to mock such cosmic hypocrisy as this. For it is simply the ancient apparatus by which the cunning crush the credulous. And such it will always be. The only operative “American Value” in these performances is the one of who/whom. Russia is bad and therefore if the son of a presidential candidate answers an Email from a lawyer who is Russian, we have calamitous foreign intrigue. In contrast Israel is good, and so their vast and open manipulation operation, which exists for the express purpose of foreign meddling and influence, is a thing of sweet innocence.
Oh, and how did we come to the political conclusion that Israel is good and who Israel doesn’t like is bad? Well that would be through the efforts of organizations like AIPAC.
Whoever said foreign meddling wasn’t felicitous?
As an aside, Ms. McArdle actually did address the elephant trunk in the room of her article.
Even Trump supporters seem to be having trouble mustering much of a defense. There was a lot of irrelevant sputtering on social media this morning. One Trump apologist asked me: What about Aipac? (Unfortunately, Twitter offered no way to transmit my response: an astonished, incomprehending stare.)
And now you understand how to execute a withering retort. I’m not sure if an astonished, incomprehending (sic) stare would be properly categorized as rhetoric or dialectic, but I’m just glad it wasn’t directed at me. There’s simply no counter to: אני אפילו לא יכול!