There are plenty of ways to discredit people. Dropping unvetted material is one. And then there's the more sophisticated operation that it seems likely was used to stop the career of Dan Rather in its tracks.
In s post today, Dino Alonso noted that bureaucracies often protect themselves by just deciding not to follow up on some of the tips. But…
Allegations, even horrifying ones, don’t become facts simply because they were ignored. The absence of investigation is damning, but it doesn’t substitute for one. If we collapse accusation into conclusion, we risk giving defenders of power exactly what they want, a reason to dismiss everything as sensationalism rather than confront the underlying failure of justice.
And that underlying failure is already severe enough.
What the public record shows, unmistakably, is that when allegations touch powerful men, especially men already insulated by wealth, office, or institutional loyalty, the justice system often chooses risk avoidance over truth seeking. Not because the claims are proven false, but because pursuing them would be disruptive. Costly. Dangerous to careers. Dangerous to legitimacy.
That’s not a conspiracy theory. That’s how bureaucracies preserve themselves.
https://substack.com/@dinoalonso/note/c-191316121
= new reply since forum marked as read