Our previous post struck a nerve, with demands to explain our “flimsy claim fomenting a spectacle of faux outrage”…as, of course, the Left believes all anti-Trump claims are solid.
(FYI: we define flimsy as ‘fragile, weak, insubstantial, slight, rickety, thin’)
Flimsy Claim 1: Trump worked with Russians to hack the elections. A) no evidence, since last year when the claim started, has been produced to substantiate this claim, and B) an election involves 1) voting and 2) counting votes…so it can’t be ‘hacked’.
Flimsy Claim 2: Trump gave classified information to the Russians in a meeting. A) As the President, he has the authority to declassify and discuss anything, with any nation…so he’s basically being accused – in an inflammatory way – of doing his job.
Flimsy Claim 3: Trump ordered Comey to drop the Flynn investigation. This one’s a doozy, regarding A) a memo NO ONE HAS SEEN, B) supposedly written by Comey to himself, C) AFTER a private meeting with the President, D) that Comey HASN’T VERIFIED, E) in which the President ‘hopes’ Comey will see his way clear to dropping an investigation, F) a few weeks AFTER the FBI announced it found no wrongdoing by Flynn.
Since when is hearsay – from a memo no one has seen, may not exist, and even if it does exist can’t be credibly dated – evidence of anything? Even if it does exist, since when does ‘hope’ become re-defined as ‘I order’? And why isn’t it right to ask that a costly investigation be dropped when the FBI admits no wrongdoing has been found?
Democrats and the media had no problem with Obama coercing the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s PROVABLY illegal email activities…yet now scream from the rooftops?
Yeah…we said it…FLIMSY.