Pitiful: Chris Matthews Trumpets the President’s Obstruction, Ponders His Ousting

FedEx Office can easily print either of the two images above into posters for your home. Just so you know.

Moving on…

Oh boy…

A few weeks ago, CNN asked if we were “FINALLY” ready to impeach the President (seen here). Here’s another stellar example of media professionalism.

On MSNBC’s Hardball Thursday, host Chris Matthews pushed the narrative that Donald Trump is guilty of obstruction of justice in the Mueller investigation. Therefore, Matthews wondered if the President will now be removed from office.

Yes — it’s really that ________. (Insert the word of your choice; let me know your pick in the Comments.)

Here are the musings of an objective observer:

PAUSE:

By the way — Hi, I’m Alex Parker. I write for RedState. If I ever say something that sounds as if I write for BlueState, please understand: it’s sarcasm.

Glad to clear that up.

Now back to dumb stuff:

“Obstruction in plain sight….Could Donald Trump’s tweeting cost him his presidency? Could Robert Mueller find that Trump’s relentless threatening and bullying of possible witnesses constitute obstruction of justice? Does the fact that Trump does so so outrageously in broad daylight constitute any defense? Is this all Trump’s lawyer has to defend him? That he obstructs in plain sight.”

That’s the way Matthews opened the program.

On Thursday, The New York Times ran a piece entitled “Mueller Examining Trump’s Tweets in Wide-Ranging Obstruction Inquiry.”

Mueller Examining Trump’s Tweets in Wide-Ranging Obstruction Inquiry https://t.co/82qLLiIw4K pic.twitter.com/jgdkgJeXls

— NYT Anonymous (@NYTAnon) July 26, 2018

Matthews referenced the article, saying Robert Mueller’s team is “investigating numerous incidents that occurred privately” as well as “actions the President has taken in plain sight that could bolster a potential obstruction case.” Actions like, you know…lotsa tweets.

Matthews posed the following to guest Peter Baker:

“[It’s] fascinating because it points out that just cause you do something in public doesn’t make it’s legal or make you innocent.”

Matthews then used an example. Wanna guess where the mind of Chris Matthews went in order to provide a Trump-worthy metaphor?

He reminded us all that killing someone in public is still murder.

Thanks, Chris, for hitting us where we live. Geez.

Later on in the program, Ruth Marcus of The Washington Post told Chris she was “excited to tell [him] about obstruction of justice.” She did, however, speculate that it would be “unprecedented” to base an obstruction case “solely on Twitter.”

Rather, she theorized the case would be founded upon “tweets plus…the other things.”

The other things??

Matthews wrapped up the show with this:

“It makes clear sense that Robert Mueller’s team is looking at Trump’s tweets, his almost daily fuselage of misleading statements, public attacks, possible pardon offers to potential witnesses.”

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the mainstream media.

And that, gentlemen and ladies, is why Trump won.

Thank you for reading! Please check out some of my other articles today, such as my coverage of language and the word “illegal,” American Korean War veterans coming home, and Father’s Day (Bonus: an amazing Trump video!).

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

The post Pitiful: Chris Matthews Trumpets the President’s Obstruction, Ponders His Ousting appeared first on RedState.