It boils down to simple dictum: When you are told something, don't take any of it at face value. And don't make assumptions about intent until you do know more; which is precisely the point. You have to look deeper to get the full context of what you are being told.
A good case in point is the Syrian bombing. Out of the gate, it looked like a much needed turnaround for our de facto ex president; taking bold action to smite that Assad evil doer. And criminy sakes! Fifty nine Tomahawks? That should be pulverize city if ever there was one. Case closed. Right?
Absolutely not as it turns out and, thankfully, people like Lawrence O'Donnell had the guts to go against the grain of the usual pundits and ask the deeper questions (last Friday). And now we know that there really couldn't have been any way that Putin didn't know ahead of time that Assad was going to use those chem weapons. And the attack itself was little more than expensive window dressing, requiring little more than sweeping up a bit so bombing could begin anew.
This then begs the questions that are asked quite well on the more recent O'Donnell, "Last Word" clip linked below. And when you take that in, combined with this clip from Rachel Maddow's show, you get a picture that really reiterates why I have no problem what's so ever with referring to the head clown, in the clown car that has become of the White House, as our de facto ex president. And I can say that because it really doesn't matter whether he's guilty of an actual crime or not, the bottom line is incompetence, and probable pathological, personality instability, require that he be removed.
THE LAST WORD 4-10-17 The Trump admin's incoherent foreign policy