Watergate #2 coming up?
4 responses | 0 likes
Started by metmike - April 18, 2019, 2 a.m.

metmike:  Hannity has always been too extreme for me but he has been exactly right for the last 2 years about the Mueller investigation and Trump and appears to be right about what's about to happen, which is going to be shocking. An investigation into the real crimes, committed by the real criminals has already started.

Washington Post Columnist Declares ‘Fox News Has Been Right All Along’


"For more than two years, people in the “mainstream media” have relentlessly hammered President Trump and his allies with accusations of colluding with Russia during the 2016 election, which Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton was supposed to win in a landslide.

But once a letter from Attorney General Bill Barr revealed that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation found no evidence of this criminal conspiracy, reporters, editors and others at liberal news outlets should be forced to state that they were wrong on this issue even though it's safe to say many won't give up the ghost.

That was the thrust of an op-ed from Washington Post contributing columnist and former Hillsboro, Ohio newspaper editor Gary Abernathy with the title “Admit It: Fox News Has been Right All Along.”

However, Abernathy continued, “Fox News was right, and the others were wrong. For at least two years, MSNBC and CNN devoted hour upon hour, day after day, to promoting the narrative that Trump colluded with the Russians, and that Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III was going to prove it.”

“That turned out to be wrong,” he stated.

“Along with defending Trump, Fox News hosts such as Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham and, especially, Sean Hannity have been slammed for ... clamoring for an investigation of the investigators, aligning themselves with the President’s claim of a politically motivated witch hunt,” the columnist added.

Abernathy also stated: “Most of the media portrayed such accusations as preposterous, designed merely to divert attention from Trump’s alleged misdeeds.”

Of course, he continued, “Democrats and many in the media immediately blasted Barr for carrying Trump’s water,” and the attorney general “is being cast by the liberal cable channels and others as an unscrupulous political hack attached to the president’s leash” and the opposite of “a mostly flattering profile of the new attorney general” offered by The Post that described Barr as “less politically minded than his predecessors.”

But now, Abernathy stated, “these accusations represent an unlikely turn of events for a 68-year-old professional with an impeccable record and a career more behind him than in front of him.”

Meanwhile, “even regular viewers of CNN and MSNBC must certainly recognize the straws being grasped to justify sticking with a conspiracy theory that has been largely debunked -- although the expected release of Mueller’s report this week will probably provide just enough juice for one last effort.”

metmike: They will be trying to smear Barr(a good man) and destroy his reputation because he is finally investigating the real criminals. If Hannity is right..............and again, he has been exactly right for over 2 years, this will look as bad as Watergate. Jim Comey, Clapper,  Lorreta Lynch, Hillary Clinton, even Obama as well as others in the DOJ played a role.

White House Spied On Trump And Lied About It, Says CNN — Is This Worse Than Richard Nixon?


"As the CNN report said, "The government snooping continued into early this year, including a period when Manafort was known to talk to President Trump."

And the wiretaps were used to feed the ongoing investigation of Robert Mueller of the Trump campaign's alleged ties to Russian interference in the 2016 election.

This, by the way, puts a new gloss on why President Obama did nothing at all when first presented with evidence in the summer of 2016 that the Russians might be hacking our election. It was a way to take down the Democrats' biggest threat, the unpredictable Donald Trump.

As has been noted previously, President Obama didn't have authority on his own to request a wiretap of a U.S. citizen. That requires the Justice Department. But that doesn't mean he didn't make it happen.

The Justice Department was then headed by Loretta Lynch — one of the most politicized Attorneys-General in U.S. history, known for repeatedly bending the truth in her public comments. So it's not a stretch to think that, with a nod and a wink, Obama encouraged Lynch to go after Trump. He had every reason to do so, given that Hillary Clinton at the time seemed to be the only hope for Obama's progressive legacy to live on."

By mcfarm - April 18, 2019, 7:06 a.m.
Like Reply

Watergate 2? that is hardly the case. this current mess if handled the way watergate was handled {it will not be for obvious liberal reasons} would blow the top of the US Capital building...there are many, many people who will be in jail or executed if this were ever investigated properly with both sides of the aisle helping

By TimNew - April 18, 2019, 8:52 a.m.
Like Reply

We've seen examples of justice being selectively applied, seemingly with a party line influence/bias.

The  handling of the Obama "Fast and Furious" debacle.

Eric Holder refusing, with impunity, to pursue  documented cases of voter intimidation.

The handling of the Admin ordered tapping/surveillance of AP reporters.

The whitewash of IRS targeting  of"Right Wing" groups.

Hillary's email server scandal where she lied and obstructed about mishandling classified info. Comey detailed a laundry list of serious infractions/violations but decided that somehow,bleaching software and hammers along with intentional lying,etc,did not indicate intent.

The list goes on, but these are notable examples.

There are theories that the Clinton's have so much dirt on so many, (wasn't there an actual quote to that effect from Hill?), that DC will never seriously go after anyone remotely associated with them.

But I wonder.  Suppose you work for a government agency. And suppose oversight, for whatever reason, has reached such a lax level, that your political bias can play a role in determining how you go about doing your job. 

Seeing as how you work for a government agency, do you suppose it's likely your political bias would be to the "limited government" right, or would it more likely lean towards the "Pro government" left?

By mcfarm - April 18, 2019, 10:32 a.m.
Like Reply

if you work for any government agency what would it be tha harmful by forcing you to read and enforce our constitution as written...you would then have the answer to your question Tim...small limited, non- invasive government into states rights and the voting public

By kermit - April 18, 2019, 12:01 p.m.
Like Reply

Things are happening behind the scene. Some people off the street already. Not publicly announced. Military tribunnals started first of year. 150 million spent on Gittmo. Pedaphiles are being rounded up. This is a military manouver.  There is a goal, but it is taking time. People have to be conditioned to what is going on. Too much for most people to grasp. Child trafficing is a bigger business than drugs. Take a look back 6 months and see who was chirping, and now you do not hear from them. Look at Jeb Bushes face at funeral when he read card. Priceless