WHAT'S TRUST GOT TO DO............. GOT TO DO WITH IT?

Recently, Rudy Giuliani has been a consistent smear campaign to discredit Stormy Daniels testimony regarding her involvement with Donald Trump and the legality and purpose of an alleged transfer of funds as handled by Trump's legal advisor, Michael Cohen. None of this is new, or news. But...it does bring into question why we, as a nation, continue to allow ourselves to be distracted by false rhetoric that seems to fit our sometimes twisted worldview, rather than focusing on facts, evidence and whatever truth is revealed by legitimate research.

To be honest, I expect Rudy Giuliani to say and do much of what he says and does. He's a right wing conservative lawyer, (although not a very impressive one), who's simply trying to protect the best interests of his already questionable client, right wing conservative (I think), Donald J. Trump. That's his job, so touche' Rudy! But Giuliani makes these statements with the assumption that his credibility and Trump's credibility are automatically above reproach just because of who they are in terms of their political status and professional positions, not what has transpired. That's takes a lot of gall, especially considering how the Trump presidency is progressing so far.

I definitely get the impression that Rudy Giuliani is unfamiliar with the expression "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."

How does a person who has no credibility, and defends a president who has no credibility, determine another person's credibility? This appears to be a ploy to DISTRACT us from the real issue. Giuliani is trying to plant a seed that suggests that Trump can be trusted because he's the president, while suggesting that Stormy Daniels should not be trusted because she works in the porn industry. Stormy may or may not be a person of character, but aren't we supposed to be looking at the evidence, and not her career choice?

Based on Giuliani's logic, trust should be at the center of this issue; and, according to him, trust should also be based not on facts, evidence or character, but on one's social class, assumed authority and assumed credibility, as well as their profession. This suggests that people in certain professions are more trustworthy than others, regardless of the facts, or the evidence or one's character.

Hhhmmm, let's examine this theory further, shall we?

POLITICIAN AS AN EXAMPLE

Richard Nixon was a politician, and in the highest position of authority in this nation, yet...he was at the forefront of Watergate, and his resignation to avoid eventual impeachment and he instituted the War on Drugs which was designed to target Blacks and other people of color that is still in place today. Also...let's not forget the antics of Marion Barry and Anthony Wiener.

EVANGELICAL AS AN EXAMPLE

Let's look at Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker. A cover-up of hush money paid to Bakker's then secretary, Jessica Hahn, for alleged rape, which led to his resignation from the ministry. Subsequent revelations of accounting fraud brought about his conviction, imprisonment and divorce. Let's not forget Jimmy Swaggart's apology sermon either.

MILITARY VET AS AN EXAMPLE

How about Oliver North. Under Ronald Reagan, he was convicted in the Iran–Contra Affair of the late 1980s but his convictions were vacated and reversed, and all charges against him dismissed in 1991. As of last May, he became the new President of the NRA, the National Rifle Association; the same association that undermines national gun legislation needed to thwart mass shootings that often utilize military assault weapons. And let's not forget about Michael Flynn either.

COLLEGE COACH AS AN EXAMPLE

How about former Penn State Assistant Football coach, Jerry Sandusky, a convicted serial rapist, and child molester. In 2011, Sandusky was arrested and charged with 52 counts of sexual abuse of young boys over a 15-year period, and was sentenced to 30-60 years in prison.

TEACHER AS AN EXAMPLE

Mary Kay Letourneau, a former schoolteacher, pleaded guilty to second-degree rape of a child, her 12-year-old student, Vili Fualaau. While awaiting sentencing, she gave birth to Fualaau's child. She did six months in jail, but violated her parole and was re-sentenced to seven years in prison, and gave birth to a second daughter, while in prison between 1998 to 2004. After her release, Letourneau and Fualaau married in May 2005. This seems to be a growing trend as we learn about the discretions and convictions of Sarah Fowlkes, Stephanie Peterson, Sarah Jones, Debra Lafave, Alexandria Vera, Cori Beard, and the list goes on.

I can go on (Bernie Madoff, Jesse Jackson Jr., even the current Attorney General, Jeff Sessions), but you get the point.

Stormy Daniels' credibility regarding her relationship with Donald Trump, should not be based on her profession, but on her testimony and whatever evidence her attorney can provide us with for consideration. By the same token, Trump's innocence or guilt or involvement should not be judged by his position in office, but by his actions and whatever evidence is presented in this case.

This issue is already presented as a hotbed topic between political parties, when it really should be a bipartisan issue. This is not about political posturing, it's merely a piece of a much larger and concerning topic related to the presidential election of 2016. It's an effort to collect all the data and look at the all the evidence objectively, and to make legally appropriate determinations based on the findings. In general, this is what's supposed to take place, and would take place if we weren't as politically, racially, and economically as polarized as we are today. As complicated as we tend to make it, in our collective efforts to understand and justify human actions and reactions, the data could, and would simply speak for itself, if we let it. As such, Rudy Giuliani's character judgments are NOT required, and TRUST HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

THIS is the bait that Giuliani hopes to use to distract the public from what we really should pay attention to. It seems that Giuliani wants you and I to believe that the truth doesn't matter, and the facts be damned; that only one's PERCEPTION of it matters, and the false sense of credibility we assign you matters; not the evidence, facts, or the truth.

That didn't work out so well for the above mentioned former "pillars" of our society, and it shouldn't work here either.

T.T.M. .............................. THE TRUTH MATTERS!