(07-17-2017, 12:40 PM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(07-17-2017, 11:58 AM)FBT Wrote: Unless you have a (D) after  your name.  Then it's perfectly acceptable to do opposition research, regardless of the source, or the the trail of bodies required to obtain it (or bury it if you're a Clinton).

The bottom line her is that Donnie Jr. showed his political naivete and far too overzealous eagerness to get dirt on Clinton.  When all is said and done, stupidity isn't illegal, and neither is anything they did here.  But, as long as CNN and MSNBC can milk it for ratings, it's going to be a big story.

Here's an opinion piece from that bastion of liberalism, National Review. 

http://www.nationalreview.com/g-file/449...t-now-gone


"If you spent years — like I did, by the way — insisting that the Clintons were a corrupt affront to political decency, invoking their venal actions as a moral justification for Team Trump’s actions is the rhetorical equivalent of a remake of Waterworld set entirely in the main vat of a sewage-treatment plant, i.e., the intellectual Mother of Sh*t Shows. This is a point Ben Shapiro made well earlier this week (and which I’ve been writing about for two years now). If you want to make the case that Democrats or the media are hypocrites, whataboutism is perfectly valid (and quite fun). But if you want to say that it’s fine for Trump to do things you considered legally and morally outrageous when Hillary Clinton did them, you should either concede that you believe two wrongs make a right or you should apologize for being angry about what Clinton did. "

"Trump’s more-credible defenders certainly may be right that this is all the result of ineptitude and amateurishness. These guys are like a mix between Ron Jeremy and a yoga master in their ability to step on their own johnsons. But my wait-and-see approach was grounded in the fact that other than Trump’s public obsession with the Russia story — including his firing of James Comey — there was no concrete evidence that the Trump campaign had any dealings with the Russians. That benefit of the doubt is gone."

National Review has been in the #NeverTrump camp from the start.  They desperately backed any establishment candidate they could hoping to knock him off, going so far as to push the Evan McCullen campaign that got him on the ballot in exactly one state, and failed miserably.  Hardly the conservative publication it was before Bill Kristol took over as the editor and head honcho there.  They've been flailing away at Trump almost as much as CNN since the election.

---