America finally has a leader who doesn't rely on 'evidence' to back up his 'claims' – how refreshing

For centuries the human race has been bogged down by red tape, such as the requirement to provide evidence whenever you accuse someone of a crime

Click to follow

We’re getting used to the new President now and starting to envy Americans. At least you know your leader is concentrating, when at two in the morning he puts messages on Twitter such as “Mexicans have been stealing my biscuits. Disgrace!!! Buy your own Digestives Pedro!!”

Or “Muslim terrorists blow up Tuesdays across Europe! Bad guys make weeks shorter!!! Must attack them with werewolves.”  

This week he even mentioned how he respects women on International Women’s Day, and to prove it on that day he grabs women by the arse rather than the pussy, because he knows how to show respect.

In the daytime he can elaborate on his theories more fully. So Trump sent his press secretary to explain his revelation that Barack Obama had been tapping his phone. According to his spokesman, the crime Trump accused Obama of may have happened, because “I think that’s what we need to find out”.

You can’t get any clearer than that. For centuries the human race has been bogged down by red tape, such as the requirement to provide evidence whenever you accuse someone of a crime. Now we can dispense with that, and accuse people of whatever we fancy with no tiresome paperwork.

He can say Michelle was taking nuclear missiles out of the Pentagon and giving them to Venezuela in return for crystal meth, and when someone asks his spokesman “was she really?”, he can say “I think that’s what we need to find out”.  

Similarly he’s claimed “three to five million people voted illegally in the election”, all of them for Hillary Clinton. Weaker characters would feel the need to produce a smidgen of proof for this mass fraud, or at least suggest the name of someone who’d voted illegally, and claim that if one person was guilty it’s almost certain another three to five million must be as well.

But now we don’t need to waste time like that, because evidence is politically correct twaddle.

Ex-CIA chief says it would've been impossible for Obama to wiretap Trump

What a breakthrough it would be if the whole legal system worked like this, and anything was true if someone said it was. A random stranger could tell the police “See that bloke by the bus stop? He shot my rhino.”

Then off to jail he’d go, saving all the expense of courts and juries, and life would be one uncertain cavalcade of fun, as we all went backwards and forwards to prison because someone on magic mushrooms said we’d stolen the Taj Mahal or given their kid’s dinner money to Isis.  

In case it’s not enough that Obama hacked his phone, Trump told us on Tuesday: “122 vicious prisoners from Guantanamo Bay were released by Obama and went back to the battlefield.”

But of the people he was referring to, 113 had been released by George W Bush before Obama became President. That shows how sneaky Obama is – he was using his powers as President years before he was President. I expect he knocked on the door at Guantanamo Bay and said, “I’m the President, release everyone”, and he’d have been able to impersonate George W Bush accurately, because of all the hours he spent listening to him while he was tapping his phone.

The education system would be liberated by this method, with tedious books replaced by marvellously imaginative chaos. History teachers could say, “In 1854 the ancient city of Pompeii was blown up by a volcano planted by terrorist Muslims who were very bad.” 

Students could write on an exam paper that Eskimos were furry Muslims who couldn’t set things alight as it was too cold for the matches, and that would get them an A, as long as they added this was something they needed to find out.

So by removing the need for facts, at a stroke the whole of America would be three times as clever.

It’s also becoming unnecessary to disprove something that seems to be true. Various senior figures in his government inform us they’ve never been to Russia, then film emerges of them skating down the dome of the Kremlin and they tell us to stop making a fuss and that’s the end of it.  

It’s possible there is a logic to Trump’s pronouncements, as a batch of them usually emerge when he’s facing an awkward time. So the discovery of Obama’s phone-tapping came as he was being questioned over his latest exclusion order.

This seems to be a pattern, so next time he’s in trouble, he’ll announce the penguins in the White House zoo have died because Hillary Clinton’s eaten all their fish, or we should celebrate because women’s breasts are three times as big since his inauguration.

The temptation is to assume he can’t keep getting away with this, as he’s not playing by the rules. But he’s rewritten the rules. And politicians everywhere will want to copy him. Philip Hammond will send out tweets at 3.30am saying, “New National Insurance rates will stop bad Chinese stealing our elderly!! GIVE MY AUNT BACK MAO-TSE-TUNG!!”

But the threat of mass protests probably does concern him. Already, there’s enough of a worry about what will confront him here, that the Government keeps rearranging his visit, possibly confining it to Scotland, and making it in summer when it will be harder to arrange a demonstration. So he’ll probably end up here for twenty minutes at two in the morning, except that’s when he’ll pop to the toilet and send out a tweet saying, “Just met Queen. Great guy! Offered her Brexit deal for Stonehenge and Duchess of Cambridge. What an ass!!” So they’ll have to put him in disguise, dressed in a burqa, and sneak him back to the airport.

Comments