I am a subscriber to the Wall Street Journal but I intend to cancel it today, on October 30, 2017.
(This is NOT fake news!) It is my opinion that its Editorial Board was irresponsible to call for the republican President Donald Trump to fire the FBI’s Special Counsel Robert Muellar III who is in charge of the Trump-Russian saga inquiry. In addition the board is recommending to have the FBI instigate an investigation into the democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Convention’s ties to Russia.”
The democratic presidential contender and the DNC did hire a US entity to do opposition research into the opponent Donald Trump which is a standard operating procedure by all election campaigns. There is nothing illegal in this action. At no time did anyone involved in Hillary Clinton’s campaign interact with Russian officials who have been described by intelligence experts as supportive of the republican candidate Donald Trump and highly critical of her.
Here is the rest of the story…
On October 28, 2017, Sonam Sheth of Business Insider penned the following report, “WSJ editorial board calls for Mueller’s resignation and accuses Clinton and DNC of collusion.”
Excerpts:
- “The Wall Street Journal editorial board accused Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party of colluding with Russia earlier this week.”
- “The board also called for special counsel Robert Mueller to resign, and for the FBI to be investigated for its “role in Russia’s election interference.”
- “There is no evidence that the FBI, the Clinton campaign, or the Democratic party colluded with Russia.”
“The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board called this week for a full Russia investigation – not into President Donald Trump, but into the Democratic party, the FBI, and special counsel Robert Mueller.”
“It turns out that Russia has sown distrust in the U.S. political system-aided and abetted by the Democratic Party, and perhaps the FBI,” the editorial began. “This is an about-face from the dominant media narrative of the last year.”
“The editorial argued that a Washington Post report published Tuesday “revealed” that Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee hired the Perkins Coie law firm, which in turn retained the opposition-research firm Fusion GPS and funded a now-infamous dossier containing salacious allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia. The dossier was compiled by ex-British spy, Christopher Steele, who has several deep Russian sources.”
“Strip out the middlemen, and it appears that Democrats paid for Russians to compile wild allegations about a US presidential candidate,” the editorial said. “Did someone say ‘collusion’?”
It had been previously reported that Democrats took over funding for the opposition research from anti-Trump Republicans after Trump won the GOP nomination. On Friday, lawyers for The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative publication, told the House Intelligence Committee that the outlet originally funded the dossier’s production.”
“The FBI also reached an agreement before Election Day to continue paying Steele for his work, though the plan was terminated after BuzzFeed published the dossier in January.”
“The Journal’s editorial board said revelations about who had financed the Steele dossier indicated that the “FBI’s role in Russia’s election interference must now be investigated.”
“Mueller, the board continued, is a former FBI director who worked closely with former FBI director James Comey. Mueller was appointed special counsel after Trump fired Comey in May, and he is tasked with investigating Russia’s election interference, as well as whether the Trump campaign colluded with Moscow to tilt the election in his favor.”
“Comey was spearheading the bureau’s Trump-Russia investigation in 2016, when it was in possession of the Steele dossier. “It is no slur against Mr. Mueller’s integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years,” The Journal’s editorial board said. “He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.”
“It continued and said the revelations about who funded the Steel dossier posed a “troubling question” regarding the FBI’s involvement in what it called a “Russian disinformation campaign.”
“Did the dossier trigger the FBI probe of the Trump campaign, and did Mr. Comey or his agents use it as evidence to seek wiretapping approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Trump campaign aides?” the editorial said.”“The board was likely referring to CNN’s report in April that the bureau used information in the dossier to support its request for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant targeting Carter Page, an early foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign.”
“Legal experts told Business Insider at the time, however, that if CNN’s report was true, it indicated that the FBI had enough confidence in the dossier’s validity to work to corroborate it and present it in court.”
“And while the document does contain several unproven allegations, it has been reported that the FBI is using it as a “roadmap” for its investigation. The Senate Intelligence Committee also revealed earlier this month that it has been “working backwards” to verify the document’s allegations.”
“Nevertheless, The Journal’s editorial board called for Congress to home in on the FBI’s role in producing the dossier and to reinstate the embattled Rep. Devin Nunes as chair of the House Intelligence Committee. Nunes recused himself from the panel’s Russia investigation after it emerged that he briefed the White House on classified information without briefing his committee first.”
“Despite recusing himself, Nunes quickly began conducting his own investigation into “unmaskings” by the Obama administration and the credibility of the dossier, and subpoenaed Fusion GPS to appear before the committee.”
Related Article: Democrats, Russians and the FBI – WSJ 10/25/17
Gronda Morin 
Wow! The 1% who rule the world are certainly getting nervous that their darling Trump may be facing Mueller’s guillotine soon!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear John Fioravanti,
Yes, the 1% are worried that this will interfere with the tax cuts bill that republican legislators are trying to sell.
I had to give up calling into customer service for the Wall Street Journal to cancel as I was on hold forever. I have a feeling that there are many others doing likewise.I will do this deed later today.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLike
Good luck with that, Gronda! Hugs!
LikeLike
I cancelled my WSJ subscription last week. And when I read the editorial asking for Mueller’s firing I thought “when did the Trump family buy that paper?”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Suze,
Good for you! I didn’t see the editorial until October 30th, but I did cancel as well. I am thinking that there were too many subscribers to the WSJ who are in the 1% who want that damn tax cut bill for the wealthy to pass.
Rupert Murdoch owns News Corporation which owns Dow Jones which owns the WSJ and Barron’s. Rupert Murdoch and the president speak to each other on a weekly basis.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLike
That is quite surprising, WSJ is fairly neutral on the political scale. I can see their conservative bias hurting half their reader base and they should expect to lose subscribers.
LikeLike
Dear !EarthUnited,
I hate to have to cancel the subscription. It is helpful to read the comments sections to figure out the thinking of my conservative brothers and sisters. They will be losing many of us centrists.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Musings on Life & Experience and commented:
Now, what’s going on concerning the Wall Street Journal?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Someone is getting nervous as the heat is being turned up. 😦 — Suzanne
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Suzanne,
The conservatives see the Muellar train coming at them to where the headlights are blinding them from thinking straight. The 1% may be in jeopardy of not getting .the tax cuts that they have been dreaming about for ages.
Thanks a million times over for all of your support and for this reblog.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLike
Gronda, the sad part is while Mueller is a highly commended public servant doing his job in the right way, the President has and will continue to paint this as a witch hunt and try to point the finger in another direction. A Grand Jury indictment is extremely meaningful. Yet, if Trump feels he has air cover from cowardly Republicans in Congress, he may indeed try to fire Mueller.
The WSJ lost a lot of credibility here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Keith,
Not only was the WSJ editorial irresponsible but the Editorial Board dispensed with horrible advice that would inevitably backfire. I did check that WSJ did actually publish this opinion piece as I had wondered if this wasn’t “fake news.”
By the way, this is an expensive publication.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLike
I just canceled my monthly subscription. Like you, I used it for research and although it is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Fox, it seemed more moderate than Fox, and I did sometimes find useful information there. But I cannot continue to support them after this abomination. Thanks for this post, Gronda! Hugs!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Jill,
I found the WSJ a credible reflection of what the right is thinking especially in the comments section. I am pro-business and this was a decent resource. But a line was crossed. And yes, I see Rupert Murdoch’s fingerprints on this editorial. He and the president speak to each other on a weekly basis.
The 1% want the tax cut bill badly.
Hugs, Gronda
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why does it not surprise me that Trump talks to Murdoch weekly, especially since I hear he talks to Alex Jones almost daily. The ‘man’ has some strange friends, yes?
Hugs!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person