This is not a news blog. It’s an analysis blog but I thought the attack on Paul Pelosi worth remarking on.
I deplore all violence, particularly political violence, and the preponderance of the evidence suggests that’s ultimately what the attack was. Beyond that IMO all sides are rushing to judgment and we should wait before deciding much about the incident other than to wish Mr. Pelosi a speedy recovery.
Most of what’s being said beyond the bare fact of the attack is speculation. I’ll offer one of my own: cannabis psychosis. I believe it’s an increasingly serious problem and we’ll see more of it. It ain’t your grandpa’s weed anymore.
The perpetrator was clearly a nut, whatever his politics, motive, or circumstances.
Anything is possible at this point,
Even that the attacker knew them.
This isn’t a comedy blog either, but given Paul Pelosi’s recent DUI, the caption will read,†hammered again.â€
That’s a good one, Grey….about “hammered again.â€
I don’t think politics had anything to do with this weird engagement, except for the media’s attempt to pin it on political rivals. In the meantime as more dribbles out, including the initial police call, Paul Pelosi seemed to know the guy he tussled with, who was in his underwear, with the possible entry door having glass broken from the inside not the outside.
Elon Musk has publicly put out what lots of people were already thinking, about the tawdry back story lurking behind the Paul Pelosi attack.
However, the left continues to spin it as an act of right wing extremism, even though the facts, the “attacker’s†background, his neighbors’ perspective only points out the culprit’s left wing ideology and crazy, drug-addled mentality. Then you have all the questionable details surrounding the attack of a democrat speaker’s family member – where is the “3rd personâ€; why did Pelosi call the guy “his friendâ€; how did the guy get into such a guarded and monitored home; where is the body cam footage???
It all adds up to lies and a cover- up, IMO.
Among the many things I hate about modern journalism is the need to tell a story, i.e. push a narrative. At this point to the best of my ability to determine all narratives being pressed on these events fall short.
I’m afraid the days of the 5 Ws are long gone. Now they’re entertaining and indoctrinating us.
Non-biased investigative journalism is what is severely lacking. It seems that the depth, however, to which a news publication digs depends on whether an R or a D follows the main figure’s name in the story.
For instance, if it was relatively easy to prove a rabid conservative broke into Pelosi’s home – someone wearing a red hat and carrying a red-white-blue flag – every paper would sport huge headlines, body cams and security footage would be expeditiously released, Nancy Pelosi would be personally in front of a mic, not her surrogates, and reporters would be combing through every possible source, finding dirt before it could be verified to juice up details that would humiliate and destroy not only the villain but anyone or any political entity associated with that person.
The opposite, though, is happening to Pelosi’s “Dave.†More appears to be hidden or even back-pedaled than openly and publicly exposed, providing not only confusing but contrary accounts of the incident. But that is the nature and contours of a political press, one who has the back of one party while stabbing the back of the opposing party.
If anklet there was a right wing press and media.
Steve