On November 3, 2017, a man entered the private property of a sitting U.S. senator uninvited.  He snuck up behind and assaulted the senator with such violence that he broke six ribs and damaged the senator's lungs, leading to pneumonia and severe pain.  These injuries prevented the senator from returning to Congress for a crucial debate in which he played a leadership role.

If a right-wing assailant had broken the bones of Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer, sending either of them to a pain-filled hospital bed, the outcry from both sides of Congress would have been ear-shattering.  The left-wing media would have blared about the hateful, violent right wing.  Felony charges appropriate to an indubitable federal crime would have been filed immediately.  But in this case, the attacker, Dr. Rene Boucher, is an outspoken Democrat, and his victim, Senator Rand Paul, is a prominent Republican.

The Republican congressional leadership have shown little interest in the case, and Democrats have had nothing to say.  Within hours of the injurious attack, the fake news magisteria cooked up a bogus narrative about an ongoing dispute between the two men regarding landscaping.  The media concocted the "lawn care dossier" to trivialize the crime.  The lawn care dossier serves the larger purpose that the assault be prosecuted as a misdemeanor in state law rather than a federal offense, which it is.  This shift in narrative parallels changing "gross negligence" to "extreme carelessness" on behalf of Hillary Clinton.  On December 6, 2017, the Washington Post polished up and pushed the lawn care dossier in an article, "Intrigue grows over what sparked the attack on Rand Paul."  The narrative of intrigue between Drs. Boucher and Paul is 100% fake and 1,000% irrelevant.

Following the assassination of President Kennedy, Congress passed 18 U.S. Code 1751 in 1965, making it a federal crime to kill, kidnap, or assault the president or vice president of the United States.  Due to an extraordinary tragedy of American history, Congress expanded those protections to congressmen following the 1968 assassination of President Kennedy's brother, Senator Robert Kennedy.  Congress passed 18 U.S. Code 351 in 1971 establishing the precedence of federal law above state law in cases of serious crimes committed against congressmen and other high-ranking federal officials.

"Congressional, Cabinet and Supreme Court assassination, kidnapping and assault penalities," 18 U.S. Code Section 35, states: "Whoever assaults any person designated in subsection (a) of this section [a Member of Congress or a Member-of-Congress-elect] shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year or both; and if the assault involved the use of a dangerous weapon, or personal injury results, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

Neither USC 1751 nor 351 refers to or gives importance to the grievances assailants may hold against the official they attack.  The statutes do not separate personal from political hatred held by the perpetrators.  This is wise, because hate cannot be cut up like fudge, and such boundaries in mental states of hatred do not exist.  It may not be coincidental that congressmen are mentioned first in the expanded list of protectees.  Congressmen are especially vulnerable.  They maintain homes in their districts and must stay in touch with their constituents.  Furthermore, it would be costly to assign full, permanent secret service detail to 535 congressmen across the nation.

The American people are watching the Mueller investigation into Trump-Russia collusion decompose like a corpse.  The worst fumes wafting from the special counsel's workplaces are the high stink of extreme pro-Democrat, anti-Republican bias, which is also present in the media's portrayal of the crime against Senator Paul.  Immediately after the assault, Dr. Boucher's lawyer provided a psychoanalysis of motivation and declared that the attack "[h]ad nothing to do with politics."  Left-wing news media jumped on that irrelevancy and started asking, If the assault was not about politics, what was it about?

As with James Comey's decriminalizing Hillary's e-mail malfeasance by psychoanalyzing her absence of intent, the fake news has been pushing unknowable and legally immaterial theories about Dr. Boucher's motivation.  And as with the collusion-delusion, their flim-flammery involves intoning that "there's a lot of smoke here."  The left-wing media bring in their own smoke machines, and when they've created enough smoke, they conclude there must have been something going on between the neighbors to explain the assault because there's so much smoke.

After the assault, the senator's wife, Dr. Kelley Paul, spoke poignantly about her husband's severe pain and about the left-wing media's victim-blaming in the case: "It is incredibly hurtful that some news outlets have victimized Rand a second time as he struggles to recover, delighting in hateful headlines like 'Not A Perfect Neighbor,' and concocting theories about an 'ongoing dispute,' based on nothing more than speculation from an attention-seeking person with no knowledge of anything to do with us."  She added that her husband had not spoken to that neighbor in a decade and did not provoke any kind of violent behavior.

Nevertheless, the Washington Post recently declared, "Intrigue has deepened in the weeks since the Nov. 3 assault as Paul and Boucher have remained largely quiet about what prompted it."  Intrigue is deepening just as it did when Hillary ponied up for the pee-pee dossier against Trump, while her friends at the Justice Department shook off any remaining bodily fluid and carried it over to the FISA court for her.  The lawn care dossier includes suppositions about lawn-mowing, composting, errant pine needles, and a Jackie Gleason impersonation uttered ten years ago – "One of these days, pow – right in the kisser." – conveniently remembered a decade later by a nosy neighbor.  The Post seems to blame the alleged perpetrator and his victim for this deepening "intrigue" because their silence has created "a vacuum."  Rand Paul has already stated, "If someone mugs you, is it really justified for any reason?," and Boucher has to keep his mouth shut because he's been charged with a misdemeanor and is under investigation for the federal crime he certainly committed.

The Post blows smoke thusly: "Into the vacuum, competing theories for the assault have been floated, like so many Washington trial balloons. They range from the mundane, such as bad blood over spoiled views of a lake, to the outlandish – an Antifa plot."  The Post doesn't source these the theories.  They can't because there was no spoiled view of a lake, no Antifa plot, just left-wing irrelevant fakery.

It may seem disproportionate to compare the machinations of media like the Washington Post regarding a de facto coup against the president to the assault on a sitting senator.  But it is not.  The shooting of Representative Steve Scalise by a left-winger, like the assault on Senator Paul, constitutes a grave attack on this Republic and on the freedoms of the American way of life.  It is vital to our nation that Dr. Boucher be convicted of the federal crime he committed and serve federal time.

Here's a psychological theory, tragic if true.  Perhaps the left-wing press doesn't care, or is emotionally gratified when a leading Republican is injured and disabled.  Perhaps that is why these reporters manufacture irrelevant "intrigue" to minimize the crime.