So it looks like the real meat of this interview starts around the 48 minute mark.
And this is what so many of us, including myself, have been getting wrong.
“Our Democracy” “Strength of Democratic Institutions” “Sanctity of Democratic Institutions” doesn’t have anything to do with people voting, representatives passing laws, judges ruling on constitutional callenges to said laws.
It’s about organizations who have put a lot of effort into debating how they will rule amongst themselves. Danger to this “Democracy” comes from the public that doesn’t want to go along with the plans of their betters.
This makes sense, it’s not just some washed up old congresswoman saying “A danger to our Democracy” after drinking a bottle of Chardonnay.
From a domestic standpoint this was more important than the Putin interview.
Obviously, technology today has the potential to shape public opinion.
There are people taking advantage of that, who have experience influencing the elections of other countries in the name of “democracy.”
Since the 80’s, I’ve thought that the internet was the key to breaking the stranglehold of mass media on information, only to find that social media has emerged and already been subverted.
Toto, I’ve a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore.
“From a domestic standpoint this was more important than the Putin interview.”
Both are important, but Mike Benz’ coverage of our Government’s manipulations of information is staggering!