Better Read Than Dead

 

My stint as a cub reporter lasted one scant college semester. As such, I soon learnt the value of the follow-up question. As such, I cannot help but wonder if today’s professional journalists ever learnt that, too?

In particular, I’m referring to the oft, soft-ball lobbing reporters, who comprise the Trumpian White House Press Corps. Do they realize that each subsequent query need not be more complex than…

Mister T, why did you, just now, avoid answering my colleague’s question?

More specifically, on multiple occasions, whenever these “newshawks” have asked Donny if he’d accept an Election Day defeat, the big baby has, typically, maintained that the elections will ONLY be fair if he wins. Hell, were it any worse, he’d double down on such hubris by throwing an epic, undignified, Trumper Tantrum. But let’s not digress.

So far, to the best of my knowledge, no reporter has ever taken the dive into the deep end of Donny’s disturbed mind by asking this key follow up…

Don’t you deem it plausible that the voters would unseat a president who, on his watch, knowingly and needlessly let 204,000+ Americans die of COVID-19?

Of course, at that juncture, mucked up Donny would either tuck tail and run or summon his palace guards to escort that “baddie” reporter off the premises… perhaps even ban all such genuine article journalists from his future political rallies… uh… excuse me… my bad… his future “press conferences”.

As for what would happen next?

Well, that’d depend on whether or not Dictator Donny had learnt anything from hobnobbing with his like-minded, psychopathic, autocratic pals… you know… the ilk who literally butchered Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Hmm… perhaps the 4th Estate professionals know best, after all?

Better (to be) read than dead!

 

 

Stay Publicly Masked!
Stay Safe at Home!
Stay Healthy!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fortune Cookie Blog (Combat Boots)

 

Why do journalists, who obsess over objectivity issues, tiptoe
around Fascist régimes, as if they’re treading a tortuous path,
loaded with mountains of Fido’s feces? Since it’d be far easier
to snag some new combat boots than kneel before a dictator,
stand your ground, grow a set and kick ALL of that shit aside!

 

 

Stay Safe at Home! Stay Publicly Masked! Stay Healthy!

 

 

 

 

 

One Question Poly-Sci Pop Quiz

 

1. Who can best discipline The Tyrant; rein in his excess?

[a] The House of Reps’ oversight; the U.S. Congress
[b] The 4th Estate’s exposés; that good ol’ free press
[c] A Forbes mag spanking; from the porn star actress
[d] All of the above
[e] None of the above

 

 

 

 

The Disgraceful Embrace ~ 1 Quick Limerick #066

 

He’ll ravish women, grab at private places,
He’ll sleep with white sheeted, brown shirted bases,
For tyrant peers he feels crushes,
Over his FOX friends he gushes,
He’ll lavish sychophants with his embraces.

 

For more limericks (as well as other verses and song parodies, etc.), head over to my “Categories Menu” and select “Poetry”.

 

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat

 

To translate the above Latin blog title into colloquial English…

The burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies.

Indeed, a fair, free society presumes everyone innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The U.S. Constitution’s 6th amendment is even more explicit:

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence [sic].”

All of the above language becomes key, especially when we consider how, as of late, our daily news reportage has been featuring underlings accusing superiors of sexually harassing, abusing and/or assaulting them.

SIDEBAR: Just to be clear, here, no one should ever malign investigative journalists… discredit their factual reportage as “fake news” simply to escape an inconvenient truth / uncomfortable reality. Right is right and wrong is wrong no matter how much the facts of any story may negatively impact an accused person’s life and/or livelihood. After all, a reporter’s job #1 is to not only alert us to the fact that there are purportedly dangerous people in our midst but to also encourage other victims to come forth to proclaim, “Me too”. Moreover, whenever such stories involve elected / appointed officials and political wannabes, these reporters are also performing their patriotic duty to alert our society… our electorate… to the presence of potentially corrupt leadership… e.g. lawbreaker lawmakers, lawless law enforcers, judicial hacks, etc.

Returning now to the specifics… while our Fourth Estate’s journalists have been doing a fine job in exposing ALLEGED sexual predators and while it’s true that, statistically speaking, their victims are seldom liars, we cannot and must not ignore that in caps and italics “A” word. In other words…

The broadcast airwaves and front pages of our online and in print newspapers are not the proper venues for trying and convicting the accused.

In other words, have we not been putting the cart before the horse?

With our goal being to make our entire society a much safer, saner, pleasant place to live and work in, the accusers would be doing us a tremendous favor if they’d first report sexual harassment, abuse and assaults to the appropriate legal authorities. From there, the legal authorities would present the evidence to the prosecutors… prosecutors would go to trial whenever the evidence proved sufficiently strong… juries would weigh all the evidence to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused… and judges would punish the convicted appropriately (be that fines, community service, mental institutionalization or imprisonment).

Last but not least… that’s where the Fourth Estate’s journalists would enter the picture… act as the relentless watchdogs of the entire judicial process… sniff out any and all irregularities… verify whether or not prosecutors and defense attorneys are acting ethically… whether or not assigned judges are conducting honest and impartial trials.

Of course… all fair-minded journalists would also be serving our society well were they to grant any legitimately acquitted person an interview… to publish their story to set the record straight and restore their good name…. to give such an article the exact same positioning and prominence that trial had been given.

This all makes sense to me… how about you?