Fake News and other craziness

The Daily Sentinel of Grand Junction is contemplating filing a lawsuit against Colorado senator Ray Scott.  Scott, a Republican, tweeted that the Sentinel had published a fake news story about a bill that would change the state's public records law.

Jay Seaton, the editor of the Grand Junction paper, said Scott's tweet was libelous and that "goes to the heart of what we do."

Scott told The Washington Post that he stands by his tweet (Don't you love that expression?  "Stands by his tweet."  The world has come to statements like that.)  Here is Scott's quote that is still making the hair on the back of my neck stand up:  "We all have our own definition of fake news.  What one finds when one looks closely at the issue, is that it's a subjective, eye of the beholder thing."

In other words, in the new world order of Trumpkins, it is our subjective opinions that determine if something is real news, or fake.  Even more chilling is the opinion of John A. Francis, a visiting scholar in residence at CU Law and an expert in First Amendment law.  "The court would look at how the term is perceived by readers.  It's become such a generic epithet that it tends to be seen as a statement of opinion. . . .Fake news has become kind of a description of opinion and disagreement, more than a specific allegation of falsehood."

Jesus Christ!  This is the scariest thing I've come across since the election.

I mentioned yesterday that I caught part of Trump's presser and quickly came to the conclusion that the man is delusional and no one with a mind could possibly see anything other than the danger he poses to the country and the world.  The thing is that about 65% of the country, according to polls, react to Trump's ravings the same way I do.  But 35% of the country went away from that presser convinced that their hero, the guy who is going to make America great again, killed it and put all those dishonest people (anyone who dares find fault with anything Trumpian) in their place.

This would be kind of funny if there were enough Republicans in Washington who were willing to put country before party.  Unfortunately, there aren't.  I think the country, maybe the world, is going to come to an end before anyone develops the backbone to start an impeachment.

________________________________

On a different note, I want to praise the Post editorial writers for their strong anti-Trump stance.  In today's editorial about Jeanette Vizguerra's sanctuary at the First Unitarian Society, there was this awesome statement:  "Presented with the known facts at hand, we ask what would be the point of deporting Vizguerra?  What would the United States of America gain from such a cruel, though legal, action?  Would enforcement be worth the harm done to three innocent American children?"

Would it indeed?