Barack Obama and the Clintons’ sale of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to the Russians is tearing apart the Robert Mueller investigation, considering Mueller’s active role in the scheme and the clear evidence forcing him to focus on Democrats like Tony Podesta for possible criminal charges.
The New York Times published an article Friday headlined “Alternative Narrative Emerges in Conservative Media as Russia Inquiry Widens.”
The piece by Jeremy Peters cites Big League Politics’ recent work to explain how independent media has pushed back on the mainstream news narrative that President Trump’s team colluded with the Russians, and effectively flipped the narrative to focus on the real scandal: the Clintons’ uranium-smuggling and Mueller’s massive conflict of interest in the case related to that uranium-smuggling.
With Fox News and other outlets on the Right, including Breitbart News (where Peter Schweizer broke the Uranium One story in 2015), shining a light on the Democrat dirty dealings, it becomes nearly impossible for Team Mueller to focus merely on a politically-motivated witch hunt against Trumpists. Sure, Paul Manafort was indicted for long-ago alleged white-collar crimes, but Tony Podesta, whose Podesta Group represented Uranium One, had to resign from his namesake firm.
In the information war, truth — even if it emerges from the so-called alternative press — still counts.
Mueller was ordered to hand-deliver the uranium to the Russians:
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) July 29, 2017
Mueller’s FBI also looked the other way on a bribery plot connected to Uranium One, ensuring that the deal went through. An individual from Mueller’s law firm, a WilmerHale immigration lawyer and former Islamic Society official, was quietly appointed to the Treasury Department by Obama, where the person was key in approving the Uranium One deal, and also the sale of the cargo terminal at Port Canaveral to an Arab firm partnered with the Russians.
Now, President Trump’s close adviser Roger Stone is calling for a special prosecutor to investigate the Uranium One scandal. Such a move by Trump would likely put the final nail in the Mueller case’s coffin. Stone believes it would also finally cement Trump’s standing as an untouchable, unimpeachable, firmly-embedded commander in chief.
To the contrary Roger Stone’s plan to appoint a special prosecutor for Uranium One is solid https://t.co/JvVzO8MgNY
— Big League America (@bigleaguemerica) November 2, 2017
President Trump has the capability to appoint a special prosecutor. Why doesn’t he just do it? In the game of 4-d chess that the president has been forced to play all year, Trump has made some big mistakes.
Jeff Sessions recusing himself from any “Russia” investigations was a big mistake, or perhaps even a betrayal. Would Eric Holder ever have recused himself from Obama’s scandals? Of course not. Trump’s legal bulldog knocked himself onto the sidelines early, setting up the scenario by which Mueller became special counsel. It was a blunder, or, again, maybe a betrayal. Trump was not happy about it.
Firing James Comey was another mistake. That move was pushed for by Jared Kushner. Trump’s much-savvier political adviser Steve Bannon hated the move. It inflamed Deep State tensions at just the moment when it seemed like the “Russia” case was fading away. Comey had nothing on Trump, and was not bright enough to represent a real threat to the president. Once Comey got fired, bloodthirsty Democrats started calling for an obstruction of justice charge against Trump — even though that charge would have no merit, since Comey admitted under oath that Trump did not obstruct justice.
So now we have Mueller. All these months later — a full year after Trump won the election — the “Russia” hoax is on its last legs. Since James Clapper considered influencing a Supreme Court justice to block Trump’s inauguration back in January, the Russia hoaxers’ fortunes have gone up and down. It’s time to knock the case out for good.
That the Democrats were the ones colluding with Russia, and then blaming Trump to deflect from their own wrongdoing? That’s the real story. It’s a tactic often used by high-profile law firms. The effectiveness of that tactic hinges on the hoaxers’ ability to control narrative and public perception.
But the pro-Trump side is winning the narrative war now.
Here’s Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton calling for the Mueller case to be shut down.
Does President Trump have the courage to finally save himself and bring down his enemies once and for all?
The narrative, finally, is on his side.
HUGE: Mitt Romney Spokesman Reveals He’s Not an Automatic ‘No’ On SCOTUS Nominee Confirmation
Romney might vote to confirm a nominee.
Mitt Romney isn’t an automatic ‘no’ vote for a Supreme Court nominee in the Senate, contrary to initial reports suggesting that he would be.
Initial reports- just hours after Ginsberg’s death- from an anonymous(as usual) source claiming to be a Romney ‘insider’ had suggested that the Utah Senator was already planning to refuse a confirmation vote for a tentative Trump administration SCOTUS nominee.
— Jim Dabakis (@JimDabakis) September 19, 2020
Senator Romney’s communications director, Liz Johnson, refuted the report just hours after former Utah State Senator Jim Dabakis claimed to have been privy to it.
— Liz Johnson (@LJ0hnson) September 19, 2020
A similar report had come out at the time of Ginsberg’s death, claiming that Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley was also planning to vote no on a potential Trump administration nominee. This report that was also promptly corrected by a Grassley spokesperson.
This is a game changer for the potential confirmation prospects of a Trump administration Supreme Court nominee. It leaves Maine’s Susan Collins and Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski as the only outstanding Republican ‘no’ votes on a nominee, hypothetically opening up a possibility of 51 votes(if every single Democrat votes against a SCOTUS nominee) to confirm a judge in the Senate.
It’s even possible to confirm a SCOTUS judge with fifty votes and a Vice Presidential tiebreaker, but an extra potential vote would give Senate Republicans breathing room for error.
Romney is known for his liberal sympathies, but he has not come out in opposition to a SCOTUS nominee as of yet. He’ll doubtlessly receive a load of invective and hate from the progressive left for refusing to instantly ice a new judge, especially if he actually votes in favor of the confirmation of the eventual nominee.
Fake News Media4 days ago
SHAMEFUL: Fox News Censors Newt Gingrich for Correctly Stating George Soros’ Role in Fomenting BLM Terror
Crime4 days ago
Omaha Business Owner Who Killed BLM Rioter in Self-Defense is Hit with Multiple Felony Charges
Crime3 days ago
ILHAN’S DISTRICT: 17-Year-Old GOP Volunteer Shot Dead Outside of Gas Station in Minneapolis
News3 days ago
OUTRAGEOUS: Milwaukee Man Who was Defending His Home from a Leftist Mob is Arrested
Campaign 20203 days ago
VOTE STEAL: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules to Count Mail-in Votes Submitted After Election Day
Big League Economics4 days ago
SHAME: Democrats Are Blocking Stimulus Legislation That Includes Second $1,200 TrumpBux Check
States3 days ago
EMAIL LEAK: Nashville Dem Mayor’s Office Colludes to Hide Data Indicating Restaurants and Bars Were Not COVID-19 Hotspots
Immigration3 days ago
New Jersey IT Company Busted for Exploiting H-1B Cheap Labor Program, Must Pay $350,000 In Restitution