After multiple days of the New York Times and CNN rallying their progressive base around chants of 'treason' on the 'startling' revelation that Donald Trump Jr. would be so brazen as to take a meeting with someone offering opposition research on his father's political opponent, research that, if you believe Trump Jr.
, turned out to be a giant "nothing burger" (to use CNN's preferred language), a Republican Representative from Florida appeared on Wolf Blitzer to interject a little reality back into the latest narrative by pointing out that he, and most likely 99.9% of other politicians in Washington D.C., would have done exactly the same thing."Do I think it’s appropriate? I think I probably would have done the same thing."
"I mean, it’s opposition research and you know, anybody that’s been in an election, you’re always looking to get the upper hand."
"You know, keep in mind she wasn't an official for the Russian government that way I understand it. She's a Russian lawyer."
“And if somebody comes to us and says, ‘Hey we’ve got information on an opponent,’ yeah, I think that’s an appropriate thing to do."
Was it appropriate for Trump Jr to take Russia meeting? Rep. Yoho: “I probably would have done the same thing… it’s opposition research” pic.twitter.com/UfddUVu2nO
— The Situation Room (@CNNSitRoom)
To that point, apparently members of the Clinton campaign were offered a sneak peak of that now infamous "Trump Dossier" last year, which was compiled by ex-British intelligence official Chris Steele and was allegedly sourced from several Russia-based contacts. By the 'collusion' standards of the New York Times and CNN, isn't this more than sufficient evidence to launch an investigation into whether the Hillary Clinton campaign 'colluded' with British and/or Russian intelligence to undermine the campaign of Donald Trump?
How about the anti-Trump Republican senators who allegedly ordered the original opposition study? Shouldn't they be investigated as well?
What about Trump's 'grab em by the pussy' video, can we be certain that wasn't stolen by a Russian intelligence official and shared with the Clinton campaign?
Or, did Clinton operatives collude with NBC to drop that very damaging piece of Trump 'opposition research?'
Moreover, if an established media outlet, one that is trusted by the American public to deliver impartial news, colluded with members of the Hillary campaign to take out a candidate for President that they deemed less desirable...would that be better or worse for restoring faith in the American political system?
What about the efforts of Susan Rice and the Obama administration to spy on Trump campaign officials by turning the entire U.S. intelligence apparatus, and the FISA courts, into a political weapon? Isn't that more dangerous than a meeting with a random Russian lawyer that apparently yielded absolutely no information?
All very valid questions even though CNN would undoubtedly argue that we just committed treason by asking them.
