I know all about how that works.

Media try to convict Trump, with innuendo instead of evidence, in the court of public opinion

By —— Bio and Archives--December 13, 2017

American Politics, News, Opinion | Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

Media try to convict Trump, with innuendo instead of evidence, in the court of public opinion
Here we go again!

This time it’s alleged sexual harassment by President Trump. The anti-Trump crowd is hoping that the court of public opinion will bring him down this time, since they have not been able to find any credible evidence related to Russian collusion or obstruction of justice.

So, let’s review how this court of public opinion works.

Media are the self-appointed prosecutors

When someone is accused of a crime or a misdeed, they are innocent until proven guilty in a normal court of law. That is not the case in today’s alleged sexual harassment environment in the court of public opinion. Not all of the accused are guilty, and not all accusers are telling the truth. But some people are quick to believe the accusers without an actual trial.

The media are the self-appointed prosecutors, and the accused is without representation other than one’s self. The more the accused tries to deny and defend himself or herself, the more the media present stories that lean in favor of the accusers. At the same time, the media will dig up more accusers to make it appear in the court of public opinion that it must be true.

The prosecutorial media do not try to discover the truth, because it’s too much work and usually does not generate a bombshell headline. In a real court of law it’s called the discovery phase, which happens before the actual trial begins. For example, Roy Moore’s first accuser recently admitted that she added information to the so-called signed page of her yearbook. I don’t recall any stories calling her credibility into question after her admission.

In the court of public opinion there is no judge to ensure that all evidence is presented fairly and consistently. This leads to unfair conclusions, which can dramatically alter the outcome of an election or a person’s reputation. There is no opportunity for a defense attorney to object to false or misleading testimony, which stays in the minds of the public jurors indefinitely.

So in the court of public opinion a person is not innocent until proven guilty. There is no judge to ensure fairness and consistency. The media are the prosecutor, and the accused has no formal defense attorney. There is no phase in the process to really discover the truth, and the collective mindset of the public is the jury.

In some circles it’s called a kangaroo court, because the information and process jumps all over the place until the accused surrenders, or the prosecutorial media cannot find any more accusers.

Been there!

Please SHARE this story as the only way for CFP to beat Facebook anti-Conservative Suppression.

Only YOU can save CFP from Social Media Suppression. Tweet, Post, Forward, Subscribe or Bookmark us

Herman Cain -- Bio and Archives | Comments

Herman Cain’s column is distributed by CainTV, which can be found at Herman Cain

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.
-- Follow these instructions on registering: