During Jack Smith's deposition, Republican Judiciary Committee members were overwhelmingly focused on how he obtained their call logs related to the 2020 election. This intense focus, rather than on Trump's actions, suggests their primary concern is their own exposure and potential involvement in the events.

Related Insights

Political discourse often fixates on emotionally charged, minor components of legislation (like the 10% of a healthcare bill for immigrants) to control the narrative and divert public attention from the larger, more complex financial or policy implications that affect the other 90%.

The perception of the DOJ as a political tool is no longer a one-sided complaint. Republicans cite prosecutions of figures like Steve Bannon, while Democrats point to Trump's direct influence on indictments. This shared belief from both sides of the aisle is causing a complete erosion of the institution's credibility as an independent body.

When a politician suddenly makes a previously ignored issue intensely important, they are likely employing misdirection. The goal is to control the news cycle and public attention, either to distract from a more significant action happening elsewhere or to advance a hidden agenda unrelated to the stated crisis.

Seemingly irrational political decisions can be understood by applying a simple filter: politicians will say or do whatever they believe is necessary to get reelected. This framework decodes behavior better than assuming action is based on principle or for the public good.

When the investigation reached the President's inner circle, the government machine mobilized against the anti-corruption bodies. Ukraine's security services arrested several detectives involved in the probe, accusing them of collaborating with Russia. This tactic attempts to reframe a legitimate investigation as a threat to national security.

An administration has no incentive to fully resolve a major public scandal because its unresolved nature makes it a perfect "red herring." It can be used repeatedly to distract the public and media from current policy failures or other damaging news, making perpetual ambiguity more politically useful than transparency.

Their public refusal to testify is a calculated political dare, aimed at forcing a confrontation that highlights the hypocrisy of Republicans not compelling Donald Trump to testify under similar circumstances.

Senator Sanders describes a 'Stalinist type allegiance' within the Republican party, where dissent against Donald Trump is rare. Politicians fear that any criticism will result in them being targeted in primary elections by billionaire-funded challengers, creating a cult of personality that stifles independent thought.

When direct information is unavailable, as with the Epstein files, the most telling data is the administration's reaction. Their panic, stonewalling, and attempts to discredit the files reveal their perceived explosive nature. This method of "reading the space around the elephant" is a powerful analytical tool.

Understanding political behavior is simplified by recognizing the primary objective is not ideology but accumulating and holding power. Actions that seem hypocritical are often rational calculations toward this singular goal, including telling 'horrific lies.'