I was right to be suspicious. This image, produced by Turning Point USA, is a highly manipulative political propaganda piece

I was right to be suspicious. This image, produced by Turning Point USA, is a highly manipulative political propaganda piece. It uses cherry-picked claims to imply widespread collusion among Democrats and government officials while distorting or omitting essential facts. Let’s break it down claim by claim:

🔍 1. “An attorney general meets in secret with the spouse of someone under investigation”
Refers to: Loretta Lynch meeting Bill Clinton during the Hillary Clinton email probe.
• Truth: The meeting was inappropriate and raised questions about optics, but there’s no evidence it affected the investigation.
• Spin tactic: Uses “in secret” to imply a nefarious intent without proof.
• Omission: The FBI still publicly criticized Clinton’s actions, and she received no legal protection from Lynch.
🔍 2. “The media provides questions to one candidate in advance of a presidential debate”
Refers to: Donna Brazile sharing CNN debate questions with Hillary Clinton in 2016.
• Truth: This did happen and was unethical. Brazile eventually admitted it.
• Spin tactic: Presented without context, it suggests systemic collusion, when in fact it was one person acting unethically, not a broad conspiracy.
• Omission: CNN severed ties with Brazile, showing institutional accountability.
🔍 3. “A political party conspires with one candidate to block another in their primary”
Refers to: DNC favoring Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in 2016.
• Truth: Leaked emails suggested bias within the DNC. This caused controversy and resignations.
• Spin tactic: Uses the word “conspires” instead of “shows favoritism” to inflate it to criminal proportions.
• Omission: Sanders still ran a strong campaign; the DNC’s favoritism was a structural bias, not a rigged election.
🔍 4. “A sitting president wiretaps the candidate of the opposing party to help their opponent”
Refers to: A false claim by Trump that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.
• Truth: This has been thoroughly debunked. No evidence of wiretapping by Obama exists.
• Spin tactic: Presents a falsehood as fact to vilify Obama and suggest government abuse.
• Omission: Multiple investigations found no illegal surveillance.
🔍 5. “Government officials leak classified info to smear a sitting president”
Refers to: Claims that leaks undermined Trump, possibly about Flynn or Russia.
• Truth: Classified leaks did happen (e.g., about Michael Flynn), but many were legally protected whistleblowing or journalistic sourcing under the First Amendment.
• Spin tactic: Frames leaks as part of a “deep state” conspiracy, when many were attempts to expose misconduct.
• Omission: Some leaks led to resignations and indictments—for good reason.
🔍 6. “An FBI director hands out immunity to persons in a criminal investigation after they destroyed evidence”
Refers to: The FBI's handling of the Clinton email investigation.
• Truth: The FBI gave limited immunity to some witnesses to gather information.
• Spin tactic: “Hands out immunity” implies recklessness; in reality, this is standard practice to obtain cooperation.
• Omission: The FBI ultimately criticized Clinton's actions and reopened the case publicly before the election—which hurt her politically.
🧨 Final Verdict: Yes, it’s toxic misinformation.
This image uses:
• Partial truths or unethical actions exaggerated into conspiracy
• Disproven claims presented as fact
• No comparative analysis of collusion claims related to Trump (e.g., Russia interference, fake electors, obstruction, etc.)
• Whataboutism and deflection to normalize real abuses

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Death by Policy: How American Institutions Are Quietly Thinning the Herd

Image
Death by Policy: How American Institutions Are Quietly Thinning the Herd Introduction What if the greatest threat to your life wasn’t a natural disaster or a foreign enemy—but a bureaucratic decision buried in an NIH memo or a Medicaid proposal? From scientific research to healthcare access, a coordinated erosion of public good is underway. It’s slow, procedural, and written in the language of oversight and efficiency. But the outcome is unmistakable: fewer people survive. This isn’t dysfunction. It’s design. And the people who survive it? That’s no accident either. 1. NIH Subawards: Cutting the Lifeline of Global Science In May 2025, the National Institutes of Health announced that foreign institutions would no longer be eligible for subawards through U.S.-based research grants. For the layperson, this sounds like a small administrative tweak. In reality, it’s an act of scientific isolationism that endangers lives. Subawards are how research projects work across borders. A U.S....
Read more

Title: When a President Defies the Court — and Laughs About It

Image
The Trump White House didn’t just violate a federal court order — they bragged about it. On April 17, the official @WhiteHouse account mocked a New York Times headline about a man wrongly deported under Trump’s immigration policies. The man — Kilmar Abrego Garcia — had a valid asylum claim, but the administration deported him anyway, in defiance of judicial rulings. Then came the tweet. “Fixed it for you, @NYTimes,” the account posted, crossing out “wrongly deported” and replacing it with “MS-13 ILLEGAL ALIEN.” Then, the kicker: “@ChrisVanHollen — he’s NOT coming back.” This isn’t just cruel. It’s authoritarian. The Trump administration is openly thumbing its nose at the rule of law. They're ignoring judicial orders, violating constitutional norms, and doing so with public glee . They aren't hiding their contempt — they’re turning it into content. When the White House uses its platform not to explain policy but to mock a federal judge’s ruling, that’s not spin — that’s...
Read more