Andrew C. McCarthy, pinch faced National Reviewer, esteemed observer of the middle-name rule for conservatives, huge fan of American torture, former Justice Department prosecutor who has himself an aneurysm whenever The Law is abased for any reason, cannot believe that anyone would dare apply It to Donald Trump.
Nice banner, fanboi. What Donald Trump has done over the past few months is the “Anithesis of Obstruction.” [Noun: a person or thing that is the direct opposite of someone or something else.] Let us assume that McCarthy’s argument goes that Trump fired Comey because the FBI investigator was slow to put this wayward president in jail.
Trump did not obstruct a valid FBI investigation; he demanded the exposure of a false one.
Wup, my bad. Let’s assume McCarthy’s argument goes that Trump fired Comey because SQUIRREL sasquatch ibid: hex nut.
The “collusion” narrative was a fraud, plain and simple. We know that now. Hopefully, it won’t take another six months to grasp a second plain and simple truth: Collusion’s successor, the “obstruction” narrative, is a perversion.
Face it, you’re not buying “collusion”. We both know that. Just look at yourself – you’re embarrassed for even thinking it. Do you really want Andy to show up on your computer later and taunt you for “obstruction” as well? It could happen!
So let’s stick with the plain and simple: The essence of obstruction is to frustrate the search for truth. Its antithesis is to demand the exposure of fraud.
Donald Trump’s political enemies are trying to build an obstruction case on the antithesis of obstruction: the president’s insistence that the collusion fraud be exposed.
What’s the bottom line in all this? I’d say finding ‘The Truth’. And if there’s anybody who knows this ‘truth’, who might that be? DONALD TRUMP, of course. That’s why the Department of Justice should back off and leave it up to the particular person being investigated to know right from wrong. I’m confident that Donald fired the FBI Director for a good reason. Because he’s a decent man.