I don’t know whether this has shown up in your personalized news feed, but on December 16, Donald Trump is scheduled to appear in federal court in the state of New York. The topic: A civil lawsuit alleging that Trump and a former friend/associate — financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — raped a 13-year-old girl at Epstein’s residence 22 years ago. The suit was filed in June.

Haven’t heard about it? Well, it hasn’t exactly been headline news, despite the salacious allegations and some superficially credible circumstances. Reporters have looked into the case and written articles about it, but editors have consistently chosen not to sensationalize the story.

Here’s why: Because it’s probably crap.

That’s not a comment on the claims of Jane Doe. That’s why we have courts to sort this stuff out. But there are several reasons why people who care about their credibility are approaching this case cautiously, myself included. Even in the wake of the Access Hollywood tape, mainstream media editors have chosen not to include Jane Doe in their list of women accusing Trump of assault.

So why didn’t HRC tell voters that her opponent faces a civil suit accusing him of rape? Probably lots of reasons, and here’s the best one: It’s probably crap. Democratic candidates are wise to to peddle their crap cautiously, because Democratic voters in general aren’t particularly fond of it. You don’t feed them bullshit and tell them it’s locally grown heirloom organic arugula! We have our flaws, but we sure do love our fact-checkers.

So what are we to make of the grandiose wave of partisan hype that surged mightily around the wisp of a husk of a nothing that is the new “investigation” into HRC’s emails?

On Friday, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, Tweeted this:

FBI Dir just informed me, The FBI has learned of “the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation.” Case reopened

Well, that’s just crap. It’s not even what the FBI Director said.

The case has not been reopened. The case in question doesn’t even concern Clinton. Its target is the aptly named Anthony Weiner, a rising star in the Democratic Party until his sex addiction tanked his career. He’s been charged with sexting an under-age girl in another state, which apparently led to the FBI taking custody of a laptop Weiner shared with his wife, who happens to be top HRC aide Huma Abedin..

In other words, it’s crap.

Hence this lede from reporter Kurt Eichenwald, on a story initially published on Friday night by that famously radical socialist propaganda outlet, Newsweek.

The disclosure by the Federal Bureau of Investigation late on Friday, October 28 that it had discovered potential new evidence in its inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s handling of her personal email when she was Secretary of State has virtually nothing to do with any actions taken by the Democratic nominee, according to government records and an official with knowledge of the investigation, who spoke to Newsweek on condition of anonymity.

It goes on from there, but you get the point: It’s probably crap.

But here’s DJT, at a rally on Friday:

“This is bigger than Watergate. This is bigger than Watergate. In my opinion. This is bigger than Watergate.”

And here he is, Tweeting today:

Hillary and the Dems loved and praised FBI Director Comey just a few days ago. Original evidence was overwhelming, should not have delayed!

Trump knows it’s all crap — just like the wall and the Mexican rapists and the birth certificate — but it’s useful crap, so it’s instantly “bigger than Watergate.” Also — just for fun, really — here’s what Trump said about Comey in July, back when the director did something Republicans didn’t like:

The system is rigged. General Petraeus got in trouble for far less. Very very unfair! As usual, bad judgment.

So, what have we learned? Nothing about Clinton, that’s for sure. It’s not even clear that we’ve learned anything about Comey. 

But we do know one thing about Donald Trump. He thinks the majority of the American people are too dumb to tell boring old truth from fabulist bullshit.

Well? Is he right?

Just how dumb are we?

 

%d bloggers like this: