CNN's Eye is on the Sparrow

American Thinker.com ^ | May 22, 2022 | Clarice Feldman

[Kaslin]

Jack Sparrow, that is, the movie pirate played by Johnny Depp, whose defamation suit against his ex-wife Amber Heard is full of the kind of meaningless salacious nonsense CNN’s declining viewership is capable of focusing on. For grownups, another trial in nearby Washington, D.C. is of far greater import, the trial of Michael Sussmann, but as Professor Charles Lipson notes on Facebook:

I scanned through 2 hours of CNN coverage. No mention of the Sussmann trial at all (as usual) and no mention of Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook’s unexpected revelation that Hillary herself approved spreading the false Alfa bank story…. If CNN covered the revelation on other shows, please let me know. Otherwise, it looks like they are news undertakers, not reporters.

For those whose local press is as focused on nonsense as CNN, let me recap the significance of this week’s proceedings instituted by special counsel John Durham after a lengthy investigation into the origins of the Russian hoax, which was generated and promoted by Hillary Clinton to advance her election and which, after she lost, served to tie up President Trump and his administration with investigations and impeachments. The indictment was a detailed 26-page outline indictment of the case which is now ongoing. It is precise and limited -- Sussman is accused of lying to the FBI’s General Counsel in September 2016 when he asserted that he was not representing a client at the time he claimed that Russia’s Alfa Bank was a direct conduit between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Hot Air summarizes the week’s revelations -- “revelations” may not be the word exactly, as there was plenty of evidence already that this is what occurred, but this week, it was nailed down in documentary and sworn testimonial evidence:

[nikos1121]

I thought a conservative bought controll of CNN.

When do things change?

[where's_the_Outrage?]

As usual, one set of rules for republican, another for democrats, from later in the article:

Once again, Democratic wrongdoing is being tried before partisan judges and juries in the capital. Professor Jonathan Turley in a series of tweets, points out that Sussman’s trial is “in stark contrast” to the trial of General Flynn in D.C. Among other things, the Flynn judge refused to immediately close the case even after the prosecution moved to drop it.

In contrast, Sussman’s judge, Obama appointee Christopher Cooper, refused to strike from the jury pool a woman whose daughter is a teammate of Sussman’s daughter; and three other jurors who donated to Clinton, “including one who could only promise to ‘strive for impartiality as best I can.” On the Hill site Turley elaborated on this, detailing the judge’s restrictive rulings and concluding:

[upchuck]

Clarice Feldman ping.

If you'd like to be on or off the Clarice Feldman ping list, usually issued only on Sunday morning, please click Private Reply below and drop me a FReepmail.

[moovova]

Where’s Nancy Grace when you need her?

[Elsie]

...full of the kind of meaningless salacious nonsense CNN’s declining viewership is capable of focusing on.

Montel, Rivera, Dr. Phil, Springer now have some more company among their ranks.