Capitol Hearings: Competing Narratives

[Dill]

(07-29-2021, 03:17 PM)hollodero Wrote: Btw. for me, seldomly was something so clear-cut than the first impeachment. It wasn't really about diplomacy that much. As I saw it, it was about a president blocking Congress-approved funds to pressure a country fighting a common foe into producing made-up charges against a domestic opponent. One does not need to be versed in diplomacy to know that this is wrong (or that forcing an ambassador out by smear campaigns from Giuliani and all that stuff that went along with it was wrong). The commen counternarratives hardly touched the case at hand at all and went along the lines of "Adam Schiff wants nude pictures of Trump" and lots of other stuff that was equally asinine (the hearings are held secretly! Scandal! Oh no, the hearings are a public theater! Scandal! Republicans are not allowed to speak! and whatnot) and made little sense. Oh yeah, outing the whistleblower was important. All bad, pointless counternarratives. It did not matter.

Clear-cut for you. But not for the RWM audience already "wise" to how the MSM would stop at nothing to take down Trump. 

I should have used the term "foreign policy" rather than diplomacy. Many Trump supporters were not very clear on the separation of powers as it pertains to that; they believed he, as president, had the “right” to distribute funds on his own timing. But Biden did not have the “right” to fire a Ukrainian prosecutor who was after Hunter. The REAL PROBLEM which the MSM TOTALLY ignored was the role of Ukraine in the hack of the 2016 election and the Biden Crime Family’s involvement in Ukrainian politics, e.g., Hunter on the board of an energy co. Guiliani called it right on the Biden-Obama friendly ambassador, who also attacked the prosecutor and looked to be sabotaging Trump’s directives. And pictures of Trump nude perfectly support the “Trump hate” supposed to really drive all attempts to curb Trump’s flagrant and continued breaches of rule of law.
 
If you consider the impeachment from the Right angle, from the so-called “whistleblower” to the ambassador to the Hunter cover up, it is indeed “clear cut” that Senate Republicans foiled another deep state coup attempt. But it is pointless to argue with you because you take “fake news” from the NYT and WaPo at face value. And you hate Trump anyway.
 
So this counter-narrative, like every other, develops systematically to counter Dem points point-by-point. And it ambiguates the impeachment and proceedings enough for enough voters to insure Trump misses impeachment and NOT because GOPers embrace a double standard. So "nothing changes." Trump still pres. 
 
If the counter narrative does not play this role, then we must believe enough Republican Senators would say “I’m voting against impeachment even if our guy, unlike theirs, really is guilty as charged even if the case is correctly described in NYT and WaPo and Trump fired honest patriots doing their job to cover his tracks. So What?”