Did the Trump Campaign Collude with Russia?
It's the question that's been covered from head to toe by the media since November 9.
It's a question that has widened the political chasm of the US in a dangerous way.
The problem is...
Every day the American public turns on the TV to watch the news, they hear pundits discuss their thoughts on the issue. It seems there is rarely ever an accurate analysis to fully describe the circumstances surrounding the situation. As of today, if someone were to google "Trump Russia", many articles discussing Jared Kushner or Paul Manaforte would pop up. However, most people would not know why or how it is significant. This is where the media comes in.
In a recent article entitled "If Trump didn't collude with Russia, why all the secret meetings?" by the Chicago Tribune, a very strong opinion is given:
"We certainly have a bonanza of "colluding" — secretly during the campaign (at Trump Tower), publicly during the campaign when Trump encouraged Russian hacking of Democrats and (undisclosed) during the transition when Kushner and Michael T. Flynn continued their forays without supervision from the Obama team. But let's not forget the administration's immediate efforts after taking office to roll back Russia sanctions, its current foot-dragging over new sanctions, Trump's sharing of code-word intelligence information with Russian officials in the Oval Office and now this unsupervised confab in Hamburg that no one thought to bring up until now."
This analysis deems disconnected events as circumstantial evidence to collusion. It is a complete opinion portrayed as an accurate analysis that is forced down American's throats.
This is a demonstrable example of agenda-setting.
My goal is not to proselytize arguments based on "who said what".
My goal is to weaken this potent power of agenda-setting.
My goal is to weaken the influence of public opinion in order to give you confidence in what you believe.
On ThinkOutsidePolitics, you'll have an accurate analysis of every situation.
When a story is especially politically divisive, you'll have a reporting of opinions on both sides. However, these will be without sources. This is to allow you to examine both sides without the influence of the media, the government, or the public. It will be you making your own choice.
For now, my partners and I will be working to bring you analyses of all political issues and controversies, especially this one. It is one involving a plethora of opinions that are deemed as fact.
For now, I ask you, the reader, to please question every assertion made about this controversy.