- Joined
- Jan 29, 2015
- Messages
- 2,778
- Reaction score
- 790
- Location
- North East
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Top 10 things the media got wrong about ‘collusion’ and ‘obstruction’
Top 10 things the media got wrong about ‘collusion’ and ‘obstruction’
April 19, 2019 ~ By Sohrab Ahmari
The prestige press has some explaining to do — for subjecting the nation to a long, cruel ordeal named “collusion” and “obstruction.” Almost two years and millions of column inches later, special counsel Robert Mueller has revealed the theory that President Trump and his campaign conspired with Russia has been just that.
All that remains of collusion and obstruction is the media’s shattered credibility....
Here are the 10 worst, drawn from among many more: CNN bungles Comey testimony, Times columnist shares fervid dreams, Washington Post ‘fact checker’ needs a fact check, The MSNBC spy who should stay in the cold, The Guardian concocts a collusion meeting, WaPo columnist’s overstated, undying Ukraine narrative, The Atlantic accuses Jeff Sessions, David Corn’s dossier debacle, McClatchy catches Michael Cohen in Prague, Buzzfeed knows who told Cohen to lie. A dishonorable New Yorker staff writer and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, instantly pivoted from Thursday’s obsession collusion to today’s obstruction of justice. He just knew President Trump was guilty of obstruction. Why? Well, because he’d long displayed frustration with the collusion probe, per his attorney general, William Barr.... “Happy people don’t obstruct justice,” Toobin tweeted. “Trump’s frustration at leaks and investigation are evidence of guilt, not innocence.” That line, of course, instantly recalled a similar effusion of legal wit and wisdom — from Elle Woods, the protagonist portrayed by actress Reese Witherspoon in the movie “Legally Blonde.” “Happy people just don’t shoot their husbands,” Woods at one point in the movie says in defense of her client. The lesson for readers: Don’t expect the collusion and obstruction obsessives to rethink the ideological mono-thought and unprofessionalism that brought their outlets to this nadir.
~~~~~~
In perusing Chapter 2 of the Mueller report I was struck by how much the investigative authors expressed hatred and disdain for President Trump. In reading their legal theories on obstruction of justice, then the evidence and finally the analysis on fact became clear. The Mueller report attempts to equate news stories with sworn witness testimony in trying to present “Facts: to show the potential for obstruction of justice.
I'd like to see DJT go nuclear on the Dems on the issue of obstruction of justice. I want AG Barr to have the FBI investigate and DOJ to prosecute the false FISA court warrants as an obstruction of justice! I'd like to see the DOJ, FBI and Intelligence agencies staff and heads to be charged by a grand jury for obstruction of justice, convicted and sent to jail. I want them flipped to go after Obama and Hillary charged with obstruction of justice, for destroying court ordered emails. I want a grand jury to determine her criminal intent.
We need to see certain Democratic leaders charged with obstruction of justice as Mueller has theorized because of their public statements that would impede the lawful assumption by Trump of his Constitutional duties to head the Justice Department. Yes anything that publicly criticizes the DOJ or gets in its way of functioning is an obstruction of justice.
And clearly Bill Clinton conspiring with the former AG Loretta Lynch on the tarmac was an obvious case of obstruction of justice.
Here are the following facts that the biased media are getting wrong today:
1. The Supreme Court has ruled that if there is no underlying crime, the investigated cannot be accused of obstruction for having pushed back in any way.
2. Therefore, the entire report regarding obstruction should not exist.
3. The obstruction findings amount to nothing more than innuendo and uncorroborated hearsay coming from a prosecutor?
4. The only possible purpose of the obstruction loose talk is to fire up a political attack coming from a prosecutor?
5. From the beginning it was known that the Dept. of Justice would not indict a sitting President. So the only point of the entire investigation had to be to entrap the President’s associates in perjury traps.
In conclusion, no matter the facts of No Collusion or No Obstruction of Justice found in this lengthy investigation, the Progressive Marxist Socialist obstructionist resistance to the duly elected president Donald J. Trump will continue.2. Therefore, the entire report regarding obstruction should not exist.
3. The obstruction findings amount to nothing more than innuendo and uncorroborated hearsay coming from a prosecutor?
4. The only possible purpose of the obstruction loose talk is to fire up a political attack coming from a prosecutor?
5. From the beginning it was known that the Dept. of Justice would not indict a sitting President. So the only point of the entire investigation had to be to entrap the President’s associates in perjury traps.
