homeagain wrote: Hey, I agree Reuters was remiss in NOT "riding this horse" down the journalistic path.
If you want to use the true definition of journalism, Reuters and 95% of the media do not qualify. All the media that bought into the Russia collusion garbage right away without doing the hard work of verifying information are now silent. They have to be silent because they would have to retract 4 years worth of being duped. Or, maybe they all knew it was garbage paid for by Clinton but the ends justified the means.
The left is angry because they are now being judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin.
AGAIN, all facts r not revealed and ALL info is subject to scrutiny .......FOXS has a rep for ramming the truth
into the ground and then attempting to dig it's way thru the "facts" which will support it's viewers.
The information that Sussmann provided to the CIA related to the Executive Office of the President concerned the time period when Barack Obama was still president, not Trump, they write.
They also say the CIA meeting took place after the 2016 election and Trump's inauguration, "at a time when the Clinton campaign had effectively ceased to exist."
The special counsel's office declined to comment beyond its public filings. FROM NPR (posted in another thread regarding this farce)
Hillary Clinton's Twitter page is denying the charges but most everyone believes she is capable of ordering this to be done to a political opponent. Her campaign spread the rumors about Barack Obama's birthplace. She was also the one who denied her husband had sex with Monica Lewinsky and blamed it all on a vast, right-wing conspiracy that turned out to be true.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.