TRUMPROPAGANDA, 2016: Keepin’ The Doubt Alive

Why is it so hard for the “experts” to see how Trump’s deceptive political propaganda unduly influenced so many voters?

Long before Trump hired Stephen K. Bannon, Nazi sympathizer and admirer of Leni Riefenstahl, to be his propaganda minister — Uh, Chief Executive of his Presidential campaign — he was using time-honored techniques of deception. After Bannon was hired, however, The Donald used more and more of these manipulative tools with greater finesse to manipulate — even brainwash — voters.

Throughout the 2016 campaign, he continually depicted — then successfully established — Hillary Clinton as a criminal who kept getting away with her crimes.

And yet, the nature of her unlawful activities, even some simple descriptions of her crimes, were never disclosed to the American public.

That’s because there were no crimes, there were no illegal activities. Her innocence, however, did not stop Donald Trump, the GOP propaganda machine, or the mass media from incessantly denouncing Hillary Clinton as a criminal who should be punished.

But punished for what? What, exactly, did she do?

It didn’t matter. What really mattered was how her opponents created serious doubts in the feelings of voters. What really mattered was the insinuation of guilt: the continuous suggestion or illusion of guilt itself. What really mattered was how they could manipulate and distort voters’s perception of Hillary Clinton.

With no evidence, no actual proof, no valid charges, no real trial, the Republicans began treating her like a criminal — as though she actually WAS GUILTY of wrongdoing.

And a lot of voters bought into this Trumpropaganda.

Like some deranged ringmaster from The Twilight Zone, Donald Trump barnstormed around the country doing his best Preacher Kinison schtick for the masses. He provided no information about her crimes. He offered no substantive accusations. But he repeatedly whipped the crowds into frenzies with his rants of “LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!”

The more he ranted, the more the mobs chanted. The more the number of his supporters grew, the less they cared about real justice for his opponent. Homemade signs with drawings of her hanging in a noose began showing up at more and more Trump rallies. Whenever Trump mentioned the words “Crooked Hillary,” his minions chimed in with same sing-song refrain: “CROOKED HILLARY! CROOKED HILLARY!” Then when he announced he was going to appoint a special prosecutor to lock her up, the crowds went wild.

In no time at all they forgot that she, along with everyone else in this country, is innocent until proven guilty. Try telling that to Fox News and the biased pundits, though. They began using code for her wrongdoing because they knew it would elicit more emotional reactions from readers and viewers than actual information would. Why bother with facts? They didn’t. They didn’t have to: they knew that using the words “Hillary Clinton” and “e-mails” together would make everyone angry. They knew that simply associating her name with the words “FBI investigation,” “Congressional hearing,” or “Clinton Foundation” would wield more hateful power than any factual information would.

They realized that any mere suggestion of guilt when associated with her name would turn voters against her. And they were right. Voters fell for these smears and accepted them as truth, without needing any actual facts to back up the accusations.

Citizens from all walks of life naively began to believe “where there’s smoke, there’s got to be fire” during an election year. Duh.

Come election day, they didn’t like Hillary, they really didn’t like her. The signs were there on numerous editorial pages.

From The New York Times ( Sunday, November 13, 2016, page 7):

“Instead of bias, what animates these voters, whatever their race or political orientation, is a profound distrust and resentment of wealthier educated Americans, a group they say lacks a connection to them and does not care about their economic situation. And to them, Mrs Clinton seemed at least as elite as Mr. Trump, if not more so…

‘Hillary hasn’t sweated a day in her life, unless it was losing a tough case as a lawyer,’ Mr. Maynard said.’ We wanted to take America in a different direction. I’m just hoping Trump will do what he says.’”

From USA TODAY ( Monday, November 14, 2016, page 7-A):

“‘In the end I held my nose and voted for Trump,’” he reported, ‘because Bill and Hillary Clinton seem to believe that the rules don’t apply to them.’”

From The Minneapolis Star Tribune ( Thursday, November 17, 2016, page A-11):

“…But I really do believe the Clintons, and the people around them enabling them, are corrupt and should be prosecuted. At the very least they should not be rewarded with the White House for their obvious dishonesty and their attitude that the rules, ethics, morality and the laws the rest of us are expected to live by simply do not apply to them…”

BUT WHAT, EXACTLY, DID HILLARY DO?

WHAT, SPECIFICALLY, DID SHE DO WITH OR TO THOSE E-MAILS?

Did she inadvertently shred top-secret documents?

Did she mistakenly give the location of a secret meeting to daughter Chelsea?

Did she accidentally send a limerick about underpants to the President of France?

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?

Never mind that Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong. In the end, what really mattered was that enough voters believed she actually did something wrong. It was the insinuation and subsequent deceptive communications of her so-called “guilt” that influenced voters on election day. Doubt — not truth — is the real killer of any candidate’s momentum.

Hey kids, propaganda works — especially Trumpropaganda!