Washington Post: Hillary Kool-Aid Drinkers

If I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation.” – Republican nominee Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton during the second presidential debate, October 9, 2016

Mark the moment. A major-party presidential nominee is officially promising to lock up his political opponent, despite an impartial federal investigation….” An anonymous Washington Post editorial, October 10, 2016

As The Post is a Hillary fundraiser, it’s impossible for them to be impartial related to Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy. In practice, that makes them a propagandist rag rather than a legitimate news source.

Trending: Duck Duck Go’s far-left political donations and abuse of user data have users FUMING

This is proven by how The Post has, once again, twisted reality into something completely unrecognizable. In their absurdist editorial “A threat to the rule of law,” Donald Trump‘s pledge to do the right thing—to prosecute Hillary Clinton’s obvious corruption—is “wrong”? Let us cite the legal basis: under Title 18, Section 1924, of federal law, it is a misdemeanor punishable by fines and imprisonment for any federal employee to knowingly remove classified information “without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location.” Mrs. Clinton’s non-government, unapproved servers certainly qualify. Thus, Mr. Trump’s promise of a special prosecutor for Mrs. Clinton is actually following legal precedent: holding the powerful to the same legal standard as everyone else. Isn’t that the purpose of our American democracy rather than the whims of the rich and politically powerful?

take our poll - story continues below

Has Big Tech Gone Too Far Banning the President?(2)

  • Has Big Tech Gone Too Far Banning the President?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Freedom Outpost updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Mysteriously, the Post doesn’t agree writing: “If anyone needed any more proof that Mr. Trump does not understand the meaning of rule of law as opposed to arbitrary rule of autocrat—that he would use the levers of the federal government in a vindictive, self-serving and corrupt manner—Mr. Trump provided it.” As an example, does Barack Obama’s continuing misuse of the IRS to target political opponents suddenly not qualify? Why does The Post confuse outsider Trump with the acts of the current president, who has existed by dictatorial overreaching executive orders for the last eight years?

In any case, since when does a politically motivated sham of an FBI investigation mean anything? Only to the Kool-Aid drinkers at The Post. They’re the ones who “snarl and double down on old falsehoods” in their jaded character assassination of truth-telling Trump.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Freedom Outpost email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

You Might Like
Previous The Official Hillary For Prison Theme Songs…
Next Planned Parenthood is Back with a Vengeance

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon to the right of the comment, and report it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation. If you don't see a commenting section below, please disable your adblocker.

Sorry. No data so far.