This Uranium One BS – one of Trump’s many go to lies for his rallies – was easilyt and thoroughly debunked – even on Fox News – but that has not put it to rest. Hopefully this will but given the dishonesty that rules in Trump world I doubt that it will.
Uranium One – A good example of the lying lies of the lying liars of the once Grand Old Party.
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
The way FOX has enabled the GOP to keep alive and exaggerate almost every conspiracy (nut job) theory in favor of the POS in Chief is totally part of the awesomeness of the First Amendment, but repeated lying to the ignorant and weak minded is despicable…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Uranium One was pushed by the “All the News Fit to Print” New York Times.
LikeLike
I’d say it was given “credibility” by the Times as they continued for WAY too long to cover a non-story for very suspect (circulation) reasons.
However, FOX stated, restated (restated) the allegation as a FACT for years…
LikeLiked by 3 people
It was PUSHED. Always on page one with the smear, and the retraction story? Page 16.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, facts are stubborn things….
LikeLike
MediaMatters attempts to discredit Peter Schweizer for unreliable reporting. But it cites a WAPO report to do so, one that claims John Huber’s investigation will close without incident. That would be the same WAPO that predicted, also based on anonymous sources, that the IG report on FISA abuse would exonerate all the participants in Crossfire Hurricane.
WAPO was wrong about the IG report. Whether it will be right about Huber’s work remains to be seen.
LikeLike
@Roberts
The IG did not find any SIGNIFICANT wrong doing in the opening of and the execution of the FBI’s investigations into Russian interference in the election and their contacts with the Trump campaign, so it is entirely clear that you have been duped again.
Each and every one of Trump’s criminal misuse of national law enforcement resources to investigate his opponents or discredit past findings has left you drooling with anticipation and each and every one has – predictably – come up with zilch. And here you go again, not yet ready to accept the complete phoniness of everything about Uranium One. Not too ridiculous.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “he IG did not find…”
Blah, blah, blah: changing the subject again.
WAPO made predictions about the IG report which proved false. Now WAPO (and you) are making predictions about Huber’s work which may prove equally false when the facts are known.
Why do you waste our time with commentary that is unsupportable?
LikeLike