Site icon Flopping Aces

Clinton partisan hack Maggie Haberman pulls a hit piece out of the recycle bin for the NY Times


 
democrats swooned when the latest Maggie Haberman NY Times hit piece was posted:


 
democrats wet their collective pants over this “breaking” piece of information.

We also learned that, according to the New York Times, in March—two months before Trump fired Comey—he ordered White House Counsel Don McGahn to stop Sessions from recusing himself. When McGahn was unsuccessful, Trump reportedly erupted in anger, saying he needed Sessions to “protect him” and “safeguard” him, as he believed other attorneys general had done for other presidents. These are very odd statements by Trump that Mueller could argue indicate that Trump wanted Sessions to impede or even end the Russia investigation to “protect him.”

The problem is, this isn’t a new story. Back in June, CNN ran this story by Chris Ruddy:

Washington (CNN)One of President Donald Trump’s friends said he believes the President is considering dismissing special counsel Robert Mueller, who was appointed to lead the FBI investigation into Russia’s potential ties to the 2016 election.

“I think it is a consideration the President has had because Mueller is illegitimate as special counsel,” Christopher Ruddy, the CEO of Newsmax Media, told CNN’s Chris Cuomo on “New Day” Tuesday. “Chris, remember there is no evidence of wrongdoing, there’s no evidence of collusion, there’s no evidence of obstruction.”

He added that he believes it would be a mistake to fire Mueller, but said the “the basis of his investigation is flim-flam.”
Ruddy first made the bombshell assertion that Trump was considering dismissing Mueller to PBS’ Jody Woodruff on “PBS Newshour” Monday night.

Nowhere in Haberman’s article is any attribution given to Ruddy. There is also considerable difference between the two. Ruddy stated that Trump was considering firing Mueller. Haberman claims Trump ordered Mueller fired. That Haberman would frame Trump in the most negative manner is to be expected. Haberman is a partisan Clinton hack:

Haberman has a history of doing this. There is no need to wonder why this story was “broken” now. Trump is killing it in Davos, the stock market has added $7 trillion since Trump took office and the text messages between the FBI adulterers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page continue to demonstrate a conspiracy to keep Hillary Clinton from accountability and frame Donald Trump for non-existent wrongdoings.

When Haberman and the NY Times have to reach into the recycle bin in a desperate attempt to make something stick to Trump you know it’s not going well.

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Exit mobile version