All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Thursday, July 25, 2019

Media reacts to Mueller-geddon



The media thought Mueller would bring the impeachment finally of President Donald John Trump. Instead, Mueller's testimony made impeachment a joke. His rambling answers to questions that had to be repeated several times symbolized the incoherency of the Democrat resistance.

They have accused President Trump of so many things that turned out to be untrue so many times that the media is no longer believed by an overwhelming number of people. Only 1% trust all media and only 17% trust most media.

The cable channels, newspapers, and White House press corps became obsessed with removing the president from office. They made the Creepy Porn Lawyer a celebrity believing, falsely, that Real Americans would rise and revolt over the claim that his client had sex with Donald Trump back when he was a TV star.

We elected a Playboy billionaire president because none of the virgins could get the job done.



After a few years of nonsense allegations and self-righteous denunciations by the media, the left went all in on the Mueller Report.

It vindicated President Trump.

There was no indictment of him or anyone in his campaign or his administration. The Paul Manafort indictment was for events that happened long before he joined the campaign, briefly, as its manager.

But in the 21st century, the news media reports emotions not facts. After the Mueller Report bombed in March, Democrats tried a summer rerun on Wednesday.

It went as expected. Mueller was so bumbling that it came off as "Weekend at Mueller's."

This morning the reviews were in. They fell into three categories: honest, dishonest, and Fantasy Island.

Politico reported, "Mueller's appearance was a disappointment to many Democrats, as the former FBI director stumbled at times, even seeming unsure of the contents of his 448-page report on Russian election interference and Trump's efforts to obstruct the investigation."

The story said Pelosi and Jerry Nadler -- the egg-shaped chairman of the committee that brought in Mueller -- are at loggerheads over this. My guess is Nadler now ranks below the Squawk Squad on Pelosi's invitation list.

Peter Baker of the New York Times wrote, "For House Democrats, who have been debating among themselves the virtues and wisdom of impeaching Mr. Trump if a Republican-controlled Senate would most likely not convict him, the day made clear that Mr. Mueller would not resolve that question by himself. At the least, they concluded there would not there be a huge popular groundswell absent new evidence or some other change in circumstance, meaning that lawmakers were left to make the difficult decision whether to proceed or not on their own."

I liked that paragraph. What a delightfully fluffy way to say nothing burger.



Susan B. Glasser of the New Yorker wrote, "Finally, Washington (Sort of) Agrees on Something: Mueller Bombed."

She wrote, "The concerns about Mueller’s halting performance were not mere theatre criticism. He was unable to defend his report and its findings beyond simply referring lawmakers to the text, over and over again. In his effort not to be trapped by Democrats into suggesting that Trump should be impeached, Mueller did a disservice to his own work. He did not need to make new assertions of law or fact but merely explain in clear terms the conclusions he reached and why. There was not one moment when he did so."

The reason he could not explain his conclusions was because it was not based on the law or fact, but rather on emotion. My goodness, Mueller pushed for an obstruction of justice charge because President Trump tweeted mean things about this witch hunt.

Ken Starr gave Republicans something to impeach Clinton on: perjury and suborning perjury.

Mueller gave Democrats his butt hurt.

Sarah Kendzior is a crazy woman who writes for the Globe and Mail in Toronto. I call her crazy because she reported a Conan O'Brien joke as a statement from Ivanka Trump, which led to a cycle or two of anti-Trump frothing by the media back in December 2016 or so.

Naturally Kendzior's take on the hearing was juiced with inanity. The Globe and Mail headlined it, "Mueller acted like a man terrified to state the obvious. The question remains: Why?"

She wrote, "Throughout the hearings, Mr. Mueller acted as if outside forces constrained his ability to answer questions. But he is no longer an employee of the Department of Justice, and they can no longer tell him what to say. The decision to narrow the scope of the questions and even his method of response (he refused to read his own report out loud) was Robert Mueller’s."

Oh no. Putin's gotten to Mueller.

Scott Jennings of CNN -- an actual Republican strategist -- summed up what happened and what should be next.

He wrote, "The partisan warfare over the Mueller report will rage, but one thing cannot be denied: Former President Barack Obama looks just plain bad. On his watch, the Russians meddled in our democracy while his administration did nothing about it."

He also said, "Two years have been spent fomenting the idea that Russia only interfered because it had a willing, colluding partner: Trump. Now that Mueller has popped that balloon, we must ask why this collusion narrative was invented in the first place."

If the media were interested in anything besides overturning the 2016 election, they would be parked outside Obama's home in Kalorama waiting to ask him about Russia the moment he came outside.

But as I said, the media reports emotions, not facts.

Which is why Mueller's testimony was their saddest day since 8 NOV 16.

Let's make 3 NOV 20 even sadder for them.

29 comments:

  1. I think a great thing happened yesterday. Since Barr first released the redacted Mueller report, Dems and their blind followers have claimed Barr redacted the evidence of Trump's guilt, both about Russia and interference. Yesterday, Mueller had the opportunity to bring any hidden info to light, thus vindicating him, the investigation, and all the liberal trolls who yelled so much after the report was released. Instead, he flat refused to even read his own report...or even recall what was in it. This is proof Barr hid nothing incriminating the president, which leaves only the Dems holding a document proving they wasted a ton of tax money on a conspiracy to overthrow a legitimate presidency.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "they wasted a ton of tax money"

    oh heck they spill more than that paying off democrat sexual harassment claims.

    waterman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. $25,000,000+ by Mueller. And we still don't know who paid off who with our tax money. Where is the brave federal prosecutor who will investigate this corruption regardless of party.

      Delete
  3. The Democrat hacks, er, "reporters" you quote had trouble typing their stories because their eyes were full of tears.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big fat juicy mouth watering tears. Ah, I can taste the salt.
      Lots of people hurt by this, liberals who are pulling their hair out, and conservatives whose sides are hurting from laughing at them.

      Delete
  4. Democrats keep referring to the DOJ policy that says you can't indict a sitting President. They claim that is the reason that Mueller did not accuse Trump of obstruction of justice.

    But that policy would not stop a special prosecutor from preparing a report laying out the evidence and the elements of obstruction and applying the facts to the law to show how there is sufficient evidence to establish probable cause to believe that Trump committed a crime.

    This report would include exculpatory evidence and citations to relevant case law.

    It is something a first year law student could prepare.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And if they were really serious about impeachment, they would have done that. I think they're just trying to keep people from defecting.

      Delete
    2. Most likely it is for the money from their fund raising, money talks and they are greedy.

      Delete
  5. "We elected a Playboy billionaire president because none of the virgins could get the job done."

    That quote, my dear Mr. Surber, is a notable quote that I shall gladly employ.

    ReplyDelete
  6. What I don't get is why the Democrats were so ignorant of Muellers status. IF he looked that bad why were they so unaware. They spent a ton of time planning this and supposedly coordinating the questions. How could they have missed his performance?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So they could throw him under the bus. They will claim that he was so old and stupid and senile that they will need another Special Prosecutor to dig up the real truth on Trump. After all, the 'narrative' is out there, we just have to fabricate the facts to fit it. And by golly, we will!

      TarsTarkas

      Delete
    2. These are the same people who think supreme court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg expresses vitality and intellect.
      .
      Same ones who thought former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton exhibited vigor and stamina in her election campaign of 2016.

      Same ones who thought that p$ycho $hrink surfer chick with the child'$ voice was credible and courageous fiction a la Anita Hill

      Delete
    3. Also the same folks who insist MO is a beauty.

      Delete
  7. I came to the conclusion he (Mueller) did not show up for work the entire 2 year period and he should refund his salary back to the taxpayers.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mueller lent his good name to the report. It rivals worthless Willie's marital fidelity for smallest things believed to exist, roughly 1/100th of a nutrino.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Seattle Times headline: "Mueller warns Congress of continued Russian sabotage"

    This is why we need traditional journalists: to make sure we don't hear stuff like "Idiot Mueller faceplants"

    Layers and layers folks!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ps. Don't worry, after the Russians burn through another $40K inFacebook ads, they will be totally tapped out!!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks for your next to last sentence. I've been commenting elsewhere that just like on 11/8/16, the media had their articles already written before anything happened and in the end the champagne bottles in the studio were unopened, hats and party favors were strewn on the floor, and ripped up articles were scattered across desks of every major network and cable media outlet. With the exception of Fox, of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. as well as the announcement of Brett Kavanaugh. they prepared three different we hates him/ her to pieces papers. and some of the wrong ones got out.

      as brad Sherman, democratic douche nozzle representing the San Fernando valley said a month after trump was sworn in,

      "if Donald trump comes out in favor of mothers day, we'd have to be against it."

      screw them. spend the wall money walling off California away from the normals. make them fly AROUND THE MIDWEST, maybe over Canada or Cuba to get to n.y.

      set up Vulcan and patriot around that pest hole. as many loathsome 3rd world diseases they have free ranging around los a holes, we should demand health quarantines and vaccinations.

      waterman

      Delete
    2. No offense, waterman, but being a Californian, I think the United States should just re-take California. There are at least 4.5 million of us that would assist the US in doing that.

      Then govern it under martial law for a while until things cool down. And they will cool down quickly - our snowflakes and illegals will self-deport and our other idiots have very short attention spans.

      Delete
    3. Since I'm another California peasant, I totally agree, peasantnumberthree!

      It would really be nice for CA to be part of the USA once again, and I miss the freedoms we used to have when I was a boy.

      This was the Golden State then, now it's the S*** Brown State, and it stinks!

      Delete
  12. Thing is, by 2015, Trump was no longer a playboy.

    He went full on domesticated.

    The playboy thing hapened long before Trump ran for President and the ony semi-credible women said it was consensual.

    Bill Clinton was a playboy in office using his position for sex. Yet, that made feminists defend him which means feminism officially died with Clinton and is only a Democrat propoganda cudgel. That is sad for those that have been used and abused sexually in the workplace, but given the Democrat party track record why should they have been surprised at this?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Take aways:
    1) Mueller was not the author.
    2) Dems and Media surrogates clueless thinking this outcome would be
    any different than it turned out to be.
    3) Most important - Dems revealed to be incompetent and corrupt to the
    nth degree.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 4) Impeachment becomes third-rail of 2020 election - Dems unzipping their fly to relieve themselves on it.

      Delete
  14. Local liberal rag headline. "Mueller warns Congress Russians will try again to interfere"
    They should have added: " - warns seniors on dangers of current heat wave"... you know, to get some meat into the story.

    ReplyDelete