The Trump-Russia collusion story continues to be eaten away, and these new notes from disgraced ex-FBI Agent Peter Strzok center on The New York Times and their reporting that got the ball rolling on this media manufactured myth. Yes, it’s about time we say that because these documents, which analyzed the piece about Trump aides having contacts with Russian intelligence officials before the 2016 election, has more utility being used to catch crap from birdcages now that’s been exposed as a fraud. In 2017, this “bombshell” dropped. Even at the outset, there was still no evidence of collusion. Just rumor and unsubstantiated gossip.
“The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation,” that’s what the Times had in their piece. It’s one of the many bombshells that turned out to be nothing burgers, part of the liberal media’s Russia fetish that turned into one of the biggest, if not the biggest, journalism fails ever. It’s sad, really. All one had to do was merely accept that Lady McBeth, aka Hillary Rodham Clinton, lost the 2016 election. Any person with cognitive function knew that this story was just simply too good to be true. Second, when weeks and months go by and no evidence arises, it’s a dud. When multiple “breaks” in the case, arise and turn out to be garbage—there’s nothing to the story. It’s not real. It’s a myth, but the anti-Trump opposition press kept pressing and pressing until we got a clown show the likes of which we have never seen. Now, part of it is a bit annoying because we all knew the truth before these clowns did, but seeing these guys fail and have their work just be totally trashed, burned to a crisp, and then pissed on is just pure gold. Two words that can be applied to the entire Democrat-media complex: Suck. It.
So, let’s get to the notes that deliver a tomahawk to the face of the liberal media. Based on the FBI’s notes, pretty much everything in it was a lie. “Misleading, inaccurate, and no evidence” are the key phrases Strzok used concerning this fake news story. The story said that Paul Manafort was plugged into the calls. The FBI said, “We are unaware of any calls with any Russian govt official in which Manafort was a party.”
The publication said Roger Stone was part of the FBI’s Russian inquiry. The FBI denied this. Then-FBI Director James Comey, who would later be fired for cause in May of 2017, also disputed the story but the NYT decided to stand by it because ‘orange man…bad.’ Well, they do deserve Pulitzers I guess for being the biggest dupes in the business for taking fake information at face value. Has the media learned that yet too? Probably not because they’re all abjectly stupid people, but not all classified information is true. It can be false. Remember that next time you report on leaks about North Korean Kim Jong-un being brain dead.
The ripple effect from stories like this was severe. It led scores of reporters down a media-manufactured alternate reality that some have not climbed out of yet. They took the blue pill and remained in wonderland.
“Ignorance is bliss,” or maybe in this case just pure unadulterated idiocy.
You guys were wrong. How many times do we have to hit you on the head with a baseball bat until you get it? You were wrong. Your stories were trash, based in lies and false information and weaponized by Democrats to try and usurp a duly elected president because you don’t like him. You’re all entitled brats who deserve an ass-kicking. And Barack Obama appears to be calling the shots on some of the major battles in this fake news fiasco, specifically when it comes to Michael Flynn, who has been vindicated regarding his role in this whole mess. He was innocent and targeted by former members of the Obama administration, including former Vice President Joe Biden.