I. Can't.

Here's the link, but I frankly wouldn't bother:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/19/opinion/amy-klobuchar-eli...

The TL;DR version is "Both the radical and the realist models warrant serious consideration. If there were ever a time to be open to new ideas, it is now. If there were ever a time to seek stability, now is it.

Anyway, I have a general question for the audience here. Do any of you read FAIR? Anyway, if you want to learn about how the American media put out crap and bless it as solemn truth, or if you are merely fishing for a reason for why whole legions of journalists ought to exchange places with the residents of homeless camps in Oakland, read FAIR.

This, according to author Paul Craig Roberts. In his urgent and compelling essay, he breaks the discovery down piece by piece. You'll want to follow the link below and read it yourself for the full effect of the logic in action. Here are a few of his key assertions:

The op-ed is a forgery. As a former senior official in a presidential administration, I can state with certainty that no senior official would express disagreement anonymously. Anonymous dissent has no credibility. Moreover, the dishonor of it undermines the character of the writer.

The New York Times’ claim to have vetted the writer lacks credibility, as the New York Times has consistently printed extreme accusations against Trump and against Vladimir Putin without supplying a bit of evidence. The New York Times has consistently misrepresented unsubstantiated allegations as proven fact. There is no reason whatsoever to believe the New York Times about anything.

Hillary is fighting a two-front war, something which no army would ever choose to do if it had the choice. But HRC does not have a choice. This is hurting her, and I predict, it will hurt her badly--even mortally in the political sense.