Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
It means what it says. The media decided Trump was guilty of collusion before Mueller had the final word.
I noted above, there are exceptions. But the large media outlets (WaPo, the Big three, NYTimes, LA Times... they all ran with the story Trump was almost certainly guilty. And as Taibbi, who'd school an unlearned blowhard like you on the facts, has detailed, these outlets ran with loads of dubious "evidence" of such guilt. And never self-corrected when it was later determined they were full of shit.
Oh, so Barr is the water handler for Trump. Look, I can understand why you'd cling to that. But get a grip. He knows that report is leaking. And he knows that if he's presenting an unduly exculpatory picture now, he's only fucking himself and his boss beyond comprehension in the near future.
I agree. Following Jaworski in Watergate. But that misses the issue, which was the media telling everyone proof of crimes by Trump which could be prosecuted in court, rather than things for which he could be impeached, was all but definitely coming. We were promised indictable offenses, and more indictments, included Don Jr.'s. They couldn't even find a basis to indict Jr. for meeting with Russians.
Except the Mueller has been quoted by Barr as saying there's no evidence of collusion -- even by Don Jr., who admitted meeting with Russians!
There was no criminal offense here. Telling the Russians to hack Hillary may offend you. To others, that may just be politics. But here's what the ex-head of the FBI just said: It's not a crime. Nor is meeting with Russians to get dirt on a candidate, apparently.
Read Taibbi on this point. There was a waterfall of "opinion reporters" pronouncing Trump guilty on one side, and a bullshit propaganda network (Fox) defending him on the other. WaPo, Times, Buzzfeed, you name it... They were all running the Trump is Going Down story. Trump didn't even have the usual conservatives behind him. Kristol and NRO were in the NeverTrump camp. He had the Washington Times, which no one reads.
Ty loves to accuse me of false equivalence. To see parity between the depth and range of voices convicting Trump before the report was out versus those defending him is comparing a A380 and a private jet.
You keep clinging to that vain hope. The report will be leaked at some point, and it may say Trump engaged in shady shit. What it won't say is that Trump engaged in collusion with the Russian Govt which was a crime. And I use that little caveat at the end there because its obvious you and everyone else who did not get what he expected in this report is pivoting to "There's collusion... it's just not technically criminal."
If you're saying that, I've a preferable alternative for you: Say nothing.
|
