Robert Mueller was “unable to clear” the President of any wrongdoing, which is decidedly not how the justice system works how every story is framed. CNN ran a long blog posted disguised as a “fact check” because the former Special Counsel “publicly refused to exonerate” the President. Using that standard, I have no proof everyone at CNN is not either a child abuser, necrophiliac, or both. I’ve looked, but I can’t exonerate them the allegations because I have yet to find proof they don’t do it.
While we’re at it, I can’t find any proof the employees of MSNBC aren’t cheating on their spouses. If I were married to any of them, especially the on-air “talent,” I’d be worried because I can’t prove otherwise. And don’t even get me started about what I can’t prove they don’t do to farm animals and small woodland creature.
No one, rightly, would accept the idea they were guilty of something simply because they couldn’t prove themselves innocent. I suspect most of us have no alibi for what we were doing when Malaysian flight 370 disappeared, does that make us suspects? Are we now a Kafka novel?By this standard, anyone is vulnerable to the most outrageous accusations. the new standard is that someone has accused you. No evidence needed. Instead, it is up to you to provide evidence of your innocence. Once again, we must resist the Dems push to turn justice on it head.
This is similar to anti-gunners who, having no evidence that any NRA member perpetrated any of the mass shootings that have plaqued our country, never the less blame that organization for those mass shootings. By that standard, I could say that while I have no evidence whatsoever, Mr. Bloomberg is guilty of funding the perpetrators of these crimes. Now Mr. Bloomberg has to prove he didn't do it., right? But of course, that is a ridiculous standard, and no, I don't believe Bloomberg committed such a heinous act. But this is what the Dems are opening us up to.