Why Some Think a Government Shutdown Might Help Donald Trump
Our Self-Induced Catastrophe At the Border
America’s Vaccine Foghorn Falls Ill, Parliament Falls for British Tabloids, and CNN Falls...
John Fetterman's Slovenliness and the Demise of Objective Social Standards
Here's What Chicago Plans to Do With the Illegal Immigrants Sleeping in Airports,...
'Public Broadcasting' Bored Silly by Republican Hearings
Jack Smith’s Gag Order Request Is Unconstitutional and Un-American
Paying Iranian Terrorists Billions in Ransom Is Nothing To Brag About, Mr. President
The Surge of Populism -- and Nationalism
It’s the Spending, Stupid
There Probably Needs to Be a Law
Project Veritas Declares Bankruptcy Months After James O’Keefe Firing
The Biden Admin's Next Plans for Illegal Aliens Should Scare You
Dave McCormick Launches Senate Bid in Pennsylvania
'Rules For Thee, Not For Me': The Democrat Party's Tried and True Slogan

When Facts Get In the Way—Blame Trump

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
AP Photo/Cliff Owen

The most significant take-away from my college education was learning to rely on evidence over opinion, hearsay, and rumor. “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion,” said Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “but not his own facts.” Never in a million years did I suspect that political correctness would come along and overrule Senator Moynihan’s famous dictum. That’s right—the geniuses of the Democratic Party Brain Trust are attempting to create their own facts.


We have a clear statement of two pertinent facts from the Mueller Report: (1) There was no Trump-Russia collusion; and (2) There is no basis for a charge of obstruction against the president. This comes after 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants, and 500 witnesses over two years of investigation. Thanks to the mainstream media’s penchant for fake news, Mueller’s conclusion was the opposite of what the Democrats were anticipating. Trump was correct when he tweeted, “No Collusion, No Obstruction, Complete and Total EXONERATION.”

Yet every time I turn on CNN or MSNBC, the insanity hits me right in the face. House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerrold Nadler, interviewed by Chris Wallace after Mueller's finding of no collusion, had the gall to insist, "We know there was collusion." What is this refusal to accept the conclusion of the special counsel if not Nadler’s attempt to create his own facts? Similarly, Democratic presidential candidate “Beto” O’Rourke tweeted, “You have a president, who in my opinion, beyond the shadow of a doubt, sought to collude with the Russian government.”

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, speaking on ABC’s This Week, insisted there is “ample evidence of collusion in plain sight.” In fact, he added, “Every act that I’ve pointed to as evidence of collusion has now been borne out by the [Mueller] report.” Did Schiff forget to take his meds? Chris Wallace reminded Schiff on Fox News Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller failed to find "the kind of coordination" that Schiff claims took place. Schiff tried to sidestep Wallace’s rebuke by using classic doubletalk: “The fact that you may not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a criminal conspiracy doesn't mean there is an absence of evidence of crime." Schiff is ignoring the basis of our legal system that if you can’t prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt, there is no crime.


Senator Elizabeth Warren, another deluded member of Congress, continues to insist that the Mueller Report justifies impeaching the president. “We cannot be an America that says it is OK for a president of the United States to try and block an investigation into a foreign attack on our country or an investigation into that president’s own misbehavior—so I have called on the House to initiate impeachment proceedings.” What the hell is Pocahontas raving about? Trump did nothing to impede Mueller’s investigation and actually cooperated on a massive scale. “Some things are bigger than politics,” Warren argued. Yes, senator, how about “some things” such as FACTS?

Actor Robert DeNiro, an unofficial member of the Democratic Brain Trust, also contradicted the special counsel’s report. “Trump obstructed justice all the time,” said the star of Raging Bull. “I mean, what are we talking about? It’s right before our eyes.” The man may be a fine actor but he obviously needs glasses. DeNiro warned that if the Mueller report doesn’t eventually give leftists what they want, “There's going to be a lot of mass demonstrations, a lot of protests.” What DeNiro is saying is, “If the facts don’t support my position, the hell with the facts.” This could be the rallying cry of today’s progressive liberal Democrats. As he advocates for diversity out of one side of his mouth, the progressive rails against viewpoint diversity—also known as free speech—out of the other. “Diversity” means “it is great to look different as long as you think the way I do.” Whatever you say that contradicts leftist ideology is “hate speech.” The Democrats are using this warped thinking to justify their assault on the facts. If a fact denies the validity of a Democratic talking point, that fact constitutes hate speech and must be relegated to the trash bin.


This is the beginning of totalitarianism. “For, after all,” wrote George Orwell in 1984, “how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?” And let’s not forget Joseph Goebbels: “The truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the state.”

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos