We've Seen This Before

(Views expressed are those of the writer, ONLY, and not those of employers, colleagues, associates, or any institutions, etc., affiliated with writer, past or present).

When one doesn't have any solutions of one's own, the most predictable reaction is to lash out.  Inscribed on the pillars of Hercules are the words, "Ne Plus Ultra." There is only so much that can be made out of emails, even if they were generated by the Secretary of State, or out of her meetings with contributors to the Clinton Foundation, while serving as Secretary of State, which have been shown to be disproportionately represented, or misrepresented, after the A.P. could not secure a meeting with the former Secretary of State in order to verify the existence of many more meetings with non-contributors that would have dispelled the rumors; CNN reports: "Near Unanimous Agreement” Among Journalists That AP Botched Its Report On Clinton."  

In the legal world, "res ipsa loquitur" translates to "the act speaks for itself."   As Americans, we are concerned about the appearance of a conflict of interest, and rightfully so, but as those brought up on the scientific method, we are also aware that there must be a material element, a tit for tat, matter, stuff, or something of substance to inscribe on the tabula rasa, which makes a connection between the thing sought, and that which is rendered in return: the fundamental law of contracts: a meeting of the minds, consideration, a writing of some kind, and if not, at the very least, reliance on a promise with foreseeable consequences (something that actually happens, that shows a material exchange of some kind).  We are also brought up observing, or learn through experience, that those who spend countless hours taking swipes at what appears to be no more than a product or figment of one's imagination, most times, have nothing worthwhile to say.  So we have two candidates: one trained at law, and the other, business.  Yet we have no business proposals (or tax returns) on the table. 

From the other candidate, we have an alluding to certain elements on the extreme right that would seem to indicate or support what J.M. Roberts, in "The History of the World," describing events that transpired at another time in history, refers to as the "excising of non-Aryan components," but taking place now, not just by way of threat of physical deportation, but by the painting of a picture of the same as "murderers" and "rapists" with respect to one, debunking their schools with respect to another, and through implicit bias with respect to all, not out of genuine concern, but only out of concern for self.   

Why go there?  Because it's serious enough (yes, public service does instill in one a concern for the public welfare; and even to go above and beyond, to the saving of lives through charitable work); and because it's traceable.  We only need go back 80 years or so, when one to whom power meant all, in another part of the world, invoked "emergency measures" to secure power, and also a place in history as possibly the worst, most despicable tyrant known to mankind.  The tactics used are the same: make it seem that problems are at the point where only one person (the one seeking power) can "fix it"; and of course, have someone else to blame.  And in this sense, everything is fair game, including the untimely death of Nykea Aldridge, which is significant, not because it is unfortunate and painful (they would have reacted in kind to other untimely deaths, and possibly done something to lessen the number of guns crossing state borders), but because it is an opportunity to seize power.