FLASHBACK: New York Times Opposed Impeachment Threats When They Thought Hillary Would Win

pjmedia.com ^ | 9/30/2019 | matt margolis

[bitt]

Before the election of 2016, Hillary Clinton’s illegal mishandling of classified information was a hot topic of conversation. By hosting her email on a private, unsecure server, she was violating several laws regarding the mishandling of classified information, and by deleting her emails that were under subpoena she was obstructing justice. Less than a week before the election, the New York Times Editorial Board wrote a scathing piece blasting Donald Trump and Republicans for the “particularly bizarre and dangerous tactic” of “warning that they may well seek to impeach Hillary Clinton if she wins, or, short of that, tie her up with endless investigations and other delaying tactics.”

“Of all the arguments advanced by the Trump forces, this has to be among the most preposterous,” they wrote, “In effect, what they’re saying is, Mrs. Clinton won’t be able to govern, because we won’t let her. So don’t waste your vote on her. Vote for us.”

“The tactic is a rejection of the nation’s need of a functioning government,” they continued. Well, isn’t that interesting? Ah, but there’s more. They called the strategy “nonsensical” and said that these threats “could cause real damage by encouraging Republicans in the next Congress to effectively take the government hostage, exacting revenge by making sure that nothing Mrs. Clinton proposes ever comes to pass.” Wow, that sounds an awful lot like what Democrats are doing to Trump right now.

[bitt]

p

[Liz]

NOTE
<><> Andrii Telizhenko, was then a political officer at Ukraine’s embassy ... dont know what he does now.
<><> Chalupa was a contractor hired by the DNC during the 2016 election.

Over lunch at a Washington restaurant, Chalupa told Telizhenko in stark terms what she hoped the Ukrainians
could provide the DNC and the Clinton campaign......... according to his account.

“Chalupa said the DNC wanted to collect evidence that Trump, his organization and Manafort were
(A) Russian assets, (B) working to hurt the U.S. and (C) working with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin against the U.S. interests.

“Chalupa indicated if we could find the evidence they would introduce it in Congress in September
and try to build a case that Trump should be removed from the ballot, from the election,” he recalled.

FEC records show Chalupa’s firm, Chalupa & Associates, was paid $71,918 by the DNC during the 2016 election cycle.

[z3n]

How do these ugly, vile cheats even look themselves in the mirror?