Professor Without Class

Professors are people who profess things. Notice that not all things professed are generally believed. In fact, when we listen closely to today's professors, we note that they are inadvertently confessing. We must test for bias before we buy as truth.

Which brings us back to our earlier quotation from Professor Heather Cox Richardson's newsletter, wherein she quoted the FBI threat report as warning about how “both domestic extremists and foreign terrorists are using online extremist messaging and calls for violence to motivate supporters to launch attacks.” (RELATED: Heather And Its Fertilizers)

The prof uses this as proof to support her next paragraph: ‘The announcement warned that a key factor in potential violence is “perceptions of the 2024 general election cycle”, a reference to disinformation suggesting that U.S. elections are rigged. This false allegation is a staple of former president Trump's political messaging.'

Let us generously overlook her failure to capitalize the word President in reference to Donald Trump. We can call it a typo rather than a hypo – a hypodermic needle injecting us to belittle a former President. She may just be bad at English or bad at typing rather than operating from bad faith.

Her larger message is more revealing of her dishonesty. The FBI document goes forwards rather than backward, fearing that 2024's result, whatever it may be, could be fodder for future fretters, fritterers and authors of political science fiction. It did not suggest likely culprits. The professor helps us by explaining that this is a reference to Trump in 2020.

The problem is that Clinton in 2016 was the trendsetter or at least the pace-setter. She actually claimed in interviews and implied in her book that there was tampering with results and that she was the actual winner. In addition, her campaign spent millions of dollars to get a British former intelligence agent to create a phony document implying that President Trump was a Russian agent, something so nefarious that no other candidate, before or after, could be accused of anything comparable.

What Trump did in 2020 was also stupid and wrong, but he never created false documents and phony evidence; he just groused and grumbled like a spoiled child. Acting like a loser to convince people you did not lose is a pathetic strategy. And not only did he not manufacture evidence to prove his point, he was too cheap to pay for a full recount in Wisconsin. So they only recounted Milwaukee, which was unutterably stupid.

Bottom line, if defeat and sour grapes go together and if those grapes produce wine which gets supporters drunk on dumb theories, and if those supporters might go out and perform stupid acts of violence to avenge the imaginary wrongs done to their party by trumped-up villainized public office-holders, this sour brew is not more likely Republican than Democrat. Remember the Democrat who shot up Republican congressional baseball practice and killed a few folks. Representative Steve Scalise has lifelong injuries to prove that angry Democrats (almost) know how to shoot.

There is more to dislike in the Prof's presentation, such as… to be continued…

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

READ NEXT: Despite Losing Billions, Target Backs Org That Wants To ‘Reclaim' Mount Rushmore