Who Are the Liars Now?

Russian collusion. In light of the findings of the Mueller report, those liars would be so many elected Democratic officials, along with their buddies in the mainstream media (MSM) who repeatedly asserted as fact that there was clear evidence of collusion with Russia. According to Attorney General Barr's summary of the Mueller report, "the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA (a Russian organization by the name of the Internet Research Agency) in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities."

As for the computer hacking of the DNC and Clinton computers, "the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."

Obstruction of justice. Oddly, Mueller refused to make a decision on this. Alan Dershowitz opined that it was a cop-out, that Mueller's job was to either say there is a basis for indictment or there is not. My thinking is, if Mueller thought there was evidence of obstruction he would have said so. Then, he could have left it to the AG to decide if a sitting President may be indicted. In any event, both the AG Barr and Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, in consultation with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel, concluded "that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction of justice offense." That should prevent any US Attorney from pursuing such charges, as their boss just said there is no basis for it.

The 3/24/19 New York Times front page headline, anticipating a report favorable to Trump, reads: "With Mueller's Report In, Interest Turns to New York." Whose interest? The MSM's continued hope that something - anything - can be pinned on Donald Trump. Maybe he cheated on a test in Middle School. The MSM will be salivating the next two years over the various additional investigations - state, federal and congressional. Why would anyone believe their prognostications now, after two years of lies.

The Los Angeles Times got their editorial up online rather quickly. Not surprisingly, they disagreed with Barr and Rosenstein saying there was insufficient evidence to prove obstruction of justice. However, with Mueller deferring on the issue, it was left to Barr. When Comey cleared Clinton, saying no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against her, he had no authority to do so. That was, in fact, up to the AG at the time, Loretta Lynch. But that was okay. The real point of the editorial, however, was this last sentence: "There is a long list of reasons why we think Trump is unfit for the presidency and dangerous for the country. The only thing we learned from Barr's summary is that colluding with Russia is no longer on it." The only thing? That was supposed to be the whole thing! Nice pivoting.

The MSM has actually not learned anything. They told us Hillary was a shoo-in to defeat Trump in 2016. But Trump did win. Can't be - must have been the Russians. So we heard non-stop about Russian collusion from the MSM for the last two years. Except, now we know there was no Russian collusion. No, the MSM has learned nothing. What we, the people, have learned from them is that they hate Trump, they hate his family, they hate anyone who works for Trump or voted for him, and they will never accept that Trump won in 2016. Instead, they will continue to feed us lies for the next two years, so brace yourselves.