Insidius Innuendo

July 29, 2019 11:11 pmComments Off on Insidius InnuendoViews: 2


Beware! Beware of insidious innuendo.

Chris Wallace used to mind his p’s and q’s but he’s come out of the closet this past year with full frontal attacks against Republicans using the Democrats painful line of artful distortion to cast aspersions.

Chris Wallace hosted Mick Mulvaney, Acting Chief of Staff on Sunday and it was painful to watch the Rep. Jerry Nadler/Rep. Adam Schiff clone, Chris Wallace work his propaganda agenda:

“MULVANEY: Mueller answered the single one outstanding question. He said — they asked him, would you have indicted the president if he were not the president? And Mueller said absolutely not, he would not do that. He answered —

(CROSSTALK)WALLACE: No, that’s not what he said. No, that isn’t what he said. He said we didn’t because of the OLC, the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines. He said we didn’t even make a decision on that.

MULVANEY: He got asked the question by Congressman Lieu, who I know, said would you have indicted him if he were not the president, and he said, yes, we would have and we went back to the beginning of a second hearing —

(CROSSTALK)WALLACE: Right, and that’s when he said — he said, yes, he did, I agree. But what he said was that we — I wouldn’t have made it — we didn’t even make that decision because the guidelines prevented us from doing that.

MULVANEY: I actually just think you’re wrong on that. If they could —

(CROSSTALK)WALLACE: The record will show what it shows. I promise you you’re wrong.”

No Chris, additionally Attorney General Barr verified on at least two occasions clarification from Mueller to confirm that the OLC ruling was not a consideration in finding that there was no evidence to bring charges against the President. Mueller was asked twice to verify it because his statements were not clear and because of the severe implications in using the OLC ruling. Chris Wallace just blatantly overlooks this history and in true Democrat fashion lies about it. A lie by omission in addition to distortion.

CBS News quoted Mueller’s first answer as to why he didn’t charge the President and his correction as follows:

“The reason again that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?” Lieu had asked.
“That is correct,” Mueller replied. There was a bit of a stir over Mueller’s initial response to Lieu because it sounded like he was saying that he might have indicted Mr. Trump were it not for the fact that he is the president. This is a conclusion that did not appear in the special counsel’s report or in his prior public statement.
Mueller amended his answer to Lieu in the afternoon, during his opening statement before the House Intelligence committee.
“Before we go to questions, I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning,” Mueller told the panel. “I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu who said, and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the president because of the OLC opinion.’ That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”

As an aside:(Note: CBS used this quote to smear the President just like the fake newsmakers they are, developing an attack on Trump, insinuating Mueller said that the President could face charges for this after leaving office. Mueller said that Trump could indeed face charges I assume, just like anyone else to include driving without a secured seat belt, speeding, or jay walking and not necessarily for a charge of obstruction of justice without evidence of a crime. Actually, they could frame the President once again and forever more, as many times as they want. Why not?  They’re fully capable of taking this smearing to the grave. They’re sending a message that should strike fear in everyone. That’s the way they operate, they do it all the time to so many people.

Chris-Boy submitted a really convoluted argument even though false, sounding like he thought he could indict and smear the President once again and get away with it just like every doggone lefty in the Country.

Then, in the same interview he asked another leading question suggesting that the President was a racist for attacking people of color. The people of color that had coincidentily attacked him. Let’s face it, Elijah Cummings is no pussy cat and is out for blood. In the end, these phony charges are serious business for this guy is a hanging judge, accusing Trump of treason, and subject to execution by hanging until he’s dead.

Trump doesn’t give a hoot for the color of your skin. He doesn’t care whether it’s pink or purple. If your a monster, you’re worthy of villification and of a response to an attack. Wallace is actually the racist. He’s shown that he believes that if your a person of color you are to be given a pass. In other words, and implicit in his charge, he believes that they are expected to fail. He anticipates that they are incapable of excellence and that should be taken into account when dealing with people of color. Be kind. Be gentle for they are the downtrodden and held to a lesser standard. If you don’t believe they are inferior and don’t give them a pass,  then your a racist.

Wallace used to have my respect thinking he was an equal opportunity antagonist, but no more.

Chris Wallace please pack your bags and leave the Country, sooner rather than later. Geez! The next thing you know, he’ll be running for public office!

Copyright©Boycottnet.com

Comments are closed

Recent Photos

24/7 Support Copyright ©1stHerald.com

Recent Comments