WHAT IF THE ‘FAKE NEWS’ MEDIA IS ONCE AGAIN PROVEN WRONG, WHAT THEN???

What if after all of the hoopla, and the wringing of hands over some supposed involvement in our last election by the evil Vlad Putin, to the point where he who was supposed to have had no chance of winning, actually won, there ends up being, as so many have already said, no there, there?  What then?  Is there any chance that those in our state-controlled media complex, as well as within the Democrat Party, who have been, and very enthusiastically so, offering all manner of conspiracy theories be held to account when they all fall apart?  While I would like to think so, I doubt many of our proud Democrats would likely give them a pass.

Actually what is far more likely to be found out here, if we actually have an honest investigation taking place, is just how it was that Hitlery’s campaign team and the DNC, were far more involved in election chicanery than was anyone onboard the ‘Trump Train.’  And am I the only one who finds it more than a bit odd how it was that a guy in the employ of the DNC, of whom it has been said allegedly fed a rather substantial number of emails to WikiLeaks, suddenly winds up dead under what are some rather curious circumstances?  And yet the focus of any investigation regarding collusion remains almost entirely on the Trump campaign.  But I digress.

The fact is that President Trump had barely returned home from his first trip abroad as president, than those supposed ‘journalists’ there at the Clinton Broadcasting System (CBS) began to get very busy suggesting how it is that he can't possibly win a long fight with the ‘fake news’ media.  It was this past Sunday that CBS reporter Errol Barnett quizzed "Face the Nation" host Johnny Dickerson, saying, “Trump is back to tweeting his unedited opinions this morning, telling people among other things, ‘Many of the leaks coming from the White House are fabricated lies coming from the fake news media.’ Are his supporters still buying that same excuse?”

For some reason we’re simply supposed to believe every politicized story, loaded up with all manner of anonymous Trump-trashing government officials as being nothing less than absolute gospel.  It doesn't matter that people leaking these stories are unquestionably driven by a political agenda.  Time and again, these leaked stories have collapsed.  And yet, none of that seems to matter much to our supposed unbiased and objective ‘journalists’.  These people have become so blinded by their hatred of a duly elected president, one they had virtually guaranteed would never be elected, they are now involved in nothing less than journalistic malpractice.

And so it was in responding to Barnett that Johnny Dickerson said, “His supporters that buy that line is a shrinking group. A lot of the things he's calling and has called fake news are now things that have either been supported by officials and members of both parties. The things he said were fake and made up are now the subject of a special counsel investigation. It`s hard to make the case that this is a fake set of inquiries."  So why is it that those issues which have now become the subject of the special counsel are automatically to be considered something other than ‘fake news’.  This assigning of special counsel is all about politics, not the facts.

So you see, this is now the kind of weird logic that passes as rational thought these days among those on the ‘looney left’ and, frankly, has for quite some time now.  A story is not considered as being fake if it's still being investigated.  If I tell you that it’s raining and you set out to investigate that claim and it is sunny, is our story not fake because you're still investigating it?  It's not a question of evidence as much as it is a question of political power and momentum.  The ends must always justify the means.  From the left’s point of view, character assassination in order to diminish and hopefully eradicate the adversary, is always a good thing.

And then it was on the Clinton News Network's program ‘New Day’, this past Tuesday that reporter/co-host, and Fox News reject, Alisyn Camerota asked former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, “Is there anything about the Russia investigation connected to the Trump campaign that troubles you?”  Sununu said, “Yeah, the reporting that’s taking place and the exaggeration of veniality at the suggestion – look, it’s now seven months since the election. And to this day no one has cited a single piece of evidence. … There is nothing there."  He said, “Look, you’re asking hypotheticals on hypotheticals."  And then added, "You have nothing.”

Camerota then said she was trying to gauge Sununu's “comfort level” with the allegations against the Trump administration that it somehow worked with Russian officials in some way to interfere with or influence the 2016 presidential election.   Sununu responded by saying, “My comfort level -- the only discomfort I have is with folks in the media trying to create a veniality without having the courage to specifically tell me what the veniality that I should be concerned about is. I don't have -- I have not identified a veniality. Have you?”  Camerota replied that Sununu “should be concerned if there was collusion.”

He said, "I don't see any evidence of collusion. Do you?”  It was then that Camerota had to admit that she does not, and she said, "Nope."  Sununu then replied, “Okay. So that should end your reporting right there. You should put an exclamation point after your ‘no’.”  But, of course, Camerota then went on say that the Robert Mueller investigation has just begun, and Sununu remarked that the FBI has been investigating for seven months, along with recently launched congressional investigations.  Sununu then said, “Okay. Can I ask a question? If Mueller comes out and says that my version is correct and yours isn't, how much crow are you going to eat?”

It was then that Camerota, not known for being particularly bright, replied, “Governor, I don't have a version of events. I asked –.”  Sununu said, “Of course you do. The whole half hour [of CNN] I listened to is a version.”  Camerota of course objected to his assertion and made the claim that CNN is only asking questions, and Sununu remarked that no wrongdoing, no error had been identified.  Camerota then claimed that Sununu viewed the investigation as “silly,” and he said no, the story and investigation are “politically motivated by folks trying to rationalize a horribly run Democratic presidential campaign.”  And he’s right!

Our once ‘mainstream media’ has now become so dishonest and so corrupt that most now see it as having morphed into what is nothing more than a purveyor of propaganda and as our primary source of ‘fake news’.  If our liberal ‘news’ organizations, both broadcast and print, report a story, we the "deplorables" have now become conditioned to simply ignore it.  Hence, the liberal media, the leftist political agendas, Democrats, snowflakes, etc, have become taboo when it comes to electability and honesty among the majority of conservatives.  In short, even the common person now has the media’s number.  And it’s zero.