There is a logical fallacy known as "argument from ignorance," which, briefly stated, is that the absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.  This phrase is being used by Adam Schiff, for example, in reference to the Mueller report on collusion with Russia by the Trump campaign. He may spin it as insisting that Mueller's investigation did not exonerate Trump and so there must be more investigation of the charges.  Exoneration basically requires that the accused could not possibly have committed the crime.  Collusion isn't criminal, by the way. The real goal is to maintain uncertainty in the public mind, as much as possible, and undermine President Trump and his efforts to lead the country.  Democrats also hope to undermine his re-election and the down-ticket results for the GOP when Trump runs again.  They want to keep that cloud over his head as long as possible. I would think it's...(Read Full Post)