Our first reaction to the story about a woman who had allegedly been making counterfeit money by photocopying the real thing was to mark it down as yet another example of the phenomenal gullibility that surrounds us today: “They can’t put anything on the Internet if it isn’t true.” Right?
But if we owe the defendant the presumption of innocence unless she can be proven guilty, that means we also owe her the assumption that she might be telling the truth when she claims to have understood that President Obama had directed Americans to begin printing their own money.
So it took only a few seconds to realize that another factor needs to be weighted at least on a par with gullibility. That would be the redefinition of reality proceeding at flank speed every minute since the beginning of the Age of Obama.
We aren’t lawyers nor do we portray them on TV, but it seems like the “reasonable person” defense might be worth a try in this case.
After all, it’s been amply demonstrated that the nation’s chief executive expects us by now to be used to the idea that he can make laws all by himself and that he’ll retaliate against anyone who challenges him on that point—just ask the Supreme Court; they seem to believe it.
So when the time comes for Pamela Downs to go on trial or cut a plea deal, we’d suggest she stick with her story, tweaked a bit with the question that knowing what we know today, why shouldn’t a reasonable person believe Obama had suggested people set up little DIY Treasury Departments?
However misguided, it could be a sign that he’s finally realized the federal government can’t do everything.