Democrats and the God of the Narrative

People involved together in a crime must necessarily lie to cover their tracks, and to lie effectively enough to convince a jury, they must lie in a coordinated fashion.  They must collude.  But to collude efficiently, they must do so in top-down fashion;  they cannot allow a bottom-up, improvised, uncoordinated sort of lying, for that would be too easily discerned.  The individual liars must not embellish the lies with additional lies of their own.   All the liars must get on the same page and do so quickly.   They must get in lockstep with one another, and this will not happen unless it somehow comes from the top.

When it comes to the criminal courts, we generally don't try groups of people as groups.   We try individuals.  An individual criminal must not only be consistent in his lying -- which is certainly difficult enough -- he must also have corroborating witnesses who are willing to lie on his behalf.  And lying in court is a risky thing.  There are stiff penalties for perjury.

 Civil courts are different.  Organizations can certainly be sued in civil court.  It happens all the time.  Individuals are sued as well.  We have the RICO laws.

 From HG.org, we have the following quotation:

RICO law refers to the prosecution and defense of individuals who engage in organized crime. In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act in an effort to combat Mafia groups. Since that time, the law has been expanded and used to go after a variety of organizations, from corrupt police departments to motorcycle gangs. RICO law should not be thought of as a way to punish the commission of an isolated criminal act. Rather, the law establishes severe consequences for those who engage in a pattern of wrongdoing as a member of a criminal enterprise.

Consideration of witness tampering is one of the provisions of the RICO statutes.  So, if it can be proved that an organization engaged in bribery in exchange for collusion and fake corroboration on the witness stand, that organization can face civil penalties, and the individuals involved can face criminal prosecution.

But, as I said in the beginning, to lie or collude efficiently, there must be top-down directives.  

Which brings us to the Democratic Party.  It has often been noticed that on many major stories -- especially those dealing with President Trump -- several media outlets uncannily use the same phraseology if not the exact same phrases to communicate the same negative opinion toward Trump's person, beliefs and/or actions.   This cannot be a coincidence.  Given that today's new cycles are so rapid (high frequency, nearly instantaneous response), this coinciding of phraseology can only mean one thing:  It happens due to a top-down communique from a single organization, and the only viable candidate for that one organization is the Democratic National Committee or DNC. 

Fortunately, today's news environment is not limited to the handful of willing colluders, not limited to  CNN, MSNBC, etc., which outlets are undoubtedly receiving talking points on a daily basis from the DNC.   The Internet is brimming with myriad alternative sources.  The secondary sources may not be on distro for the DNCs talking points, indeed, may not even be sympathetic with those points.  But there are plenty who are, and some who have a more respected and permanent in the info world, such as Wikipedia.

But the upshot of all this is that ultimate source of this collusion, the DNC, is not interested in the truth but only in one thing:  power.  When it comes to Republican talking points there tends to be more individualism.  That's why there is a plethora of conspiracy theories on the right but the left seems to be more in lockstep.  The right wing conspiracy theorists are not waiting for talking points from the RNC.  Foxnews may pay attention to RNC talking points, but the individual talking heads at Fox are not shy about disagreeing with the RNC.   It would seem also that the RNC talking points are shaped more by the bottom-up mood of the rank and file than the opinions of a few elites at the top.  

To be sure, the RNC in the past has operated in some ways similar to the top-down approach of the DNC.  But that was before the political earthquake of 2016 called Donald Trump.