> But history will see this with absolute clarity. Are you sure about that? It seems to me history is messy. Are you just asserting that one side will eventual

> But history will see this with absolute clarity. Are you sure about that? It seems to me history is messy. Are you just asserting that one side will eventually win each ideological battle and get to rewrite the history books to exclude the opposite perspective and all nuance in-between? If so: what are we supposed to conclude from knowing this? If not, then what are you saying? What makes this story "cable news fodder" is that at this point it's still essentially an unproven allegation. So we have two options: (1) GUESS at answers regarding how true the allegations are and (if true) how widespread and significant the problem might be and who might be responsible for it, then run around screaming at each other at how bad OTHER PEOPLE are for not being concerned ENOUGH about the precise version of this problem that we have hallucinated in our heads, or... (2) Wait a bit until we know more about what the details ACTUALLY are and THEN consider making it a big news story and telling the world, if it still seems sufficiently serious at that time.