Criterion for WaPo becoming hack rag …Comey Story

This is all about as shocking as Snowden telling us what we all long knew was true, that the NSA collects everything, but claims to observe only meta-data, expanding on that when ‘national security’ requires.

WaPo today has a NEWS article, not opinion, on Comey’s firing.

This is the lead para+

Every time FBI Director James B. Comey appeared in public, an ever-watchful President Trump grew increasingly agitated that the topic was the one that he was most desperate to avoid: Russia.

Trump had long questioned Comey’s loyalty and judgment, and was infuriated by what he viewed as the director’s lack of action in recent weeks on leaks from within the federal government. By last weekend, he had made up his mind: Comey had to go.

“most desperate to avoid” …did Trump share that with unnamed sources?

“I am desperate to avoid Comey talking about Russia.” Sound like Trump to ANYONE?

Now let’s look at the MEAT of Comey’s firing …

Comey reported NOTHING to Congress and the people except that he found no evidence of WIRETAPPING. I get tired saying this to those obtuse beings challenged by Trump Derangement Syndrome or Progressive Dialectic Disorder, but everyone EXCEPT YOU fools trying to convince yourselves, understands this in 140 characters to mean SECRET ELECTRONIC OBSERVATION of any kind. There is no one, to my knowledge disputing that this occurred. Otherwise Michael Flynn, and not H.R. McMasters would be National Security Chief.

Trump was angry that Comey would not support his baseless claim that President Barack Obama had his campaign offices wiretapped. Trump was frustrated when Comey revealed in Senate testimony the breadth of the counterintelligence investigation into Russia’s effort to sway the 2016 U.S. presidential election. And he fumed that Comey was giving too much attention to the Russia probe and not enough to investigating leaks to journalists.

Any investigation into the leaks to the press of the fruit of this SECRET ELECTRONIC OBSERVATION would necessarily bring questions about BOTH the crimes committed in the leak of classified information itself, AND FAR MORE DANGEROUSLY to the FBI, the NSA, the CIA, and any other ‘collector’, the how, why, and legal authority for the collection of this SECRET ELECTRONIC OBSERVATION.

Why would Comey have any desire to harm the collection of this information?

In these 2 para’s in a ‘REPORT’ by WaPo the revelation of POLITICAL HOSTILITY and their desire to advance that, instead of adversarial reporting makes it IMPOSSIBLE to take anything they say as any more factual than this:

Frankly given the hostility evinced by the press nearly across the board, I would simply make it clear the administration will answer no further questions about the matter, and work with all republicans in office to conduct themselves in the same manner.

And then, appoint Merrick Garland as head of the FBI

This is all transparently:

When did you stop beating your wife?

UPDATE…WaPo also ‘reports’ this:

And how much was the timing of Trump’s decision shaped by events spiraling out of his control — such as Monday’s testimony about Russian interference by former acting attorney general Sally Yates, or the fact that Comey last week requested more resources from the Justice Department to expand the FBI’s Russia probe?

DoJ has responded to these ‘facts’:

The Department of Justice is denying a New York Times report that James Comey requested additional money for the investigation into Russian election meddling just days before he was fired by President Trump.

“The story is totally false,” DOJ spokeswoman Isgur Flores told The Daily Caller.

Now it’s not even that I believe one or the other .. a REPORT would make note of both assertions and then find out the truth.

But, of course, who would believe the Washington Post now?

From 72-74 I thought they were the GOSPEL of reality. Those people, those beliefs, and what they meant to the editors and publishers are long gone.

What we have now is politically motivated hostility and a jumping to Dan Rather conclusions