Odd how this whole narrative thing works isn’t it? If a fictional Republican or Conservative approaches a Russian agency seeking damaging information about a Democratic candidate well hell, that’s collusion plain and simple!
But if a liberal individual approaches a Russian agency seeking damaging information about a Conservative or Republican candidate well, that’s just opposition research!
In the first example the word “traitor” get’s thrown around quite a bit, predominately against the Right Wing candidate and his staff, but also anyone disgusting enough to vote for said “traitor”. Never-ending investigations are begun and liberal lawyers are hired with tax-payer funds and paid obscene amounts of money to produce absolutely No facts, No evidence and No conclusions. When questioned about their lack of results the lawyers in question (along with a virtual drift of smarmy liberal politicians) just sneer at the camera’s and remark something to the effect of “We just have to keep on digging”
However when evidence begin to mass and it points sharply toward the left, and when it becomes evident that the collusion in question has been conducted by Democratic party members (who really, really, really, really wanted/want Hillary Rodham Clinton to be crowned Queen, er – sworn in as President) then the liberals turn from their constant blood lust against any and all things Russian and as a group ask “What’s the big deal?”
The wheels began coming off the Liberal narrative in a serious way recently, and the limping, bleeding, severely impaired story that was left (very slight pun there) was dealt another blow by an article that appeared in the Washington Post (really) that shouted out that it was the Clinton campaign and the DNC who paid for the research that led to the Russian dossier.
Combine that with the unfolding stories concerning the Uranium One deal (which is now in a serious competition with the Iran deal for “worst deal of all time” honors) and as the well whiskered guy driving the cart in the Wizard of Oz remarked “That’s a horse of a different color” and by all appearances it’s a color that Liberals seem to be severally averse to.
Liberal talking heads have become spinning heads (much like the one Linda Blair made famous) and the likes of Chris Hayes seemed to have forgotten somehow that MSNBC and CNN had been the 24 hour Russia reporting networks for months now
Fox programming is now basically 24/7 about Hillary Clinton and Uranium. It's legit amazing.
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) October 24, 2017
Here is New York Times hack doing his doggone deflecting best
Provenance of dossier is interesting, but most of what investigators & reporters have turned up on Trump + Russia has nothing to do with it.
— Nick Confessore (@nickconfessore) October 25, 2017
Apparently tweets like this were at the center of liberal consternation
Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year https://t.co/vXKRV1wRJc
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) October 24, 2017
But then there were also fun tweets like this
2. Two main narratives seem to be emerging, both disastrous for Obama or Clinton.
— Imperator_Rex (@Imperator_Rex3) October 25, 2017
So it would appear that the Democratic National Convention and Debbie Wasserman Schultz weren’t content with interfering in just their own primary (spiking the punch for Hillary over Bernie) they went after the big enchilada as well – seeking to garner Russian assistance in interfering with the big show – the Presidential election of 2016.
If Conservatives were smart they would be very liberal like in insuring that the pressure on Clinton and Company never lets up. Never mind her many appearances in which she bloviates about everything being “Debunked over and over again”, Remember in Liberal land just saying you don’t remember equals “Debunked”