The Hill: When will the media accept Trump is not a criminal target?

thehill.com...

In terminal medical cases, doctors often deal with patients who move through “stages” that begin with denial. These so-called Kübler-Ross stages can be a long road toward acceptance. A weird form of Kübler-Ross seems to have taken hold of the media. Rather than refusing to accept indicators of impending death, many journalists and analysts seem incapable of accepting signs that the Trump presidency could survive.

That painful process was more evident Tuesday night when the Washington Post reported that special counsel Robert Mueller told the White House last month that Trump was not considered a “target” but only a “subject” of the investigation. After a year of being assured that “bombshell” developments and “smoking gun” evidence was sealing the criminal case against Trump, the dissonance was too great for many who refuse to accept the obvious meaning of this disclosure.

The U.S. Attorney’s manual defines a “subject” as a “person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury's investigation.” It is a designation that can change but it is also a meaningful description of the current status of an individual. Mueller at this time apparently does not believe Trump meets the definition of a target or a “person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.” That would have been less notable when Mueller was appointed in 2017 than it is now, after more than a year, dozens of criminal counts, hundreds of thousands of documents, and a bevy of cooperating witnesses.

As stated in the article, despite MSM begrudgingly publishing the revelation, they have attempted to spin a stream of "alternative facts" and interpretations as to specific meanings.

The Hill does an excellent job at laying out their argument, and explaining why the obvious answer is the right answer in this instance.

From the OP source:

When Trump fired Comey, I supported the call for a special counsel, and I still support Mueller in completing his investigation. However, the case of criminal conduct by Trump has not materially improved over the last year. Last October, Mueller brought the first indictments against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy, Richard Gates. Notably, none of the indictments were linked to the campaign, let alone Trump.

a reply to: JBurns

The Hill: When will the media accept Trump is not a criminal target?

Oh, they've accepted it alright - they're just never going to admit to it because 'ego' is a dirty word and swimming in a river in Egypt pulls in some ratings and promotes propaganda on the unthinkers.

"The Hill: When will the media accept Trump is not a criminal target?"

When he's not President anymore obviously.

subjects become targets pretty quick, depending on what the investigation reveals...

i wouldn't uncork your champagne just yet

originally posted by: JBurns
thehill.com...

In terminal medical cases, doctors often deal with patients who move through “stages” that begin with denial. These so-called Kübler-Ross stages can be a long road toward acceptance. A weird form of Kübler-Ross seems to have taken hold of the media. Rather than refusing to accept indicators of impending death, many journalists and analysts seem incapable of accepting signs that the Trump presidency could survive.

That painful process was more evident Tuesday night when the Washington Post reported that special counsel Robert Mueller told the White House last month that Trump was not considered a “target” but only a “subject” of the investigation. After a year of being assured that “bombshell” developments and “smoking gun” evidence was sealing the criminal case against Trump, the dissonance was too great for many who refuse to accept the obvious meaning of this disclosure.

The U.S. Attorney’s manual defines a “subject” as a “person whose conduct is within the scope of the grand jury's investigation.” It is a designation that can change but it is also a meaningful description of the current status of an individual. Mueller at this time apparently does not believe Trump meets the definition of a target or a “person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant.” That would have been less notable when Mueller was appointed in 2017 than it is now, after more than a year, dozens of criminal counts, hundreds of thousands of documents, and a bevy of cooperating witnesses.

As stated in the article, despite MSM begrudgingly publishing the revelation, they have attempted to spin a stream of "alternative facts" and interpretations as to specific meanings.

The Hill does an excellent job at laying out their argument, and explaining why the obvious answer is the right answer in this instance.

They won't because he isnt

a reply to: JBurns

For a bunch of people that think the media is biased and nothing more than fake news, you guys sure do care a lot about what they say/think.

Also, your source is incorrect. Many of those indicted have links to the campaign.

I think many people on the left don't understand how much most of us hated Hilary.

They still don't believe she could have lost without some sort of cheating.

originally posted by: pianopraze
I think many people on the left don't understand how much most of us hated Hilary.

They still don't believe she could have lost without some sort of cheating.

Yes. Many people understand very well how consuming your hatred is.

But you are not in any position to speak for "most" people and what on earth does any of that have to do with the topic at hand?

a reply to: JBurns

Someone is being optimistic. How sweet. Trumps presidency will not survive.
Being a subject of this investigation is only one step away from being in the very worst position.
You guys can use this as your little binkie. A pacifier. If you like.
But it's like being first class on the titanic. You think you have an advantage but the whole ship is going to the bottom.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: pianopraze
I think many people on the left don't understand how much most of us hated Hilary.

They still don't believe she could have lost without some sort of cheating.

Yes. Many people understand very well how consuming your hatred is.

But you are not in any position to speak for "most" people and what on earth does any of that have to do with the topic at hand?

Yes, I hate to see my country pumped and dumped by Soros, Hilary and her globalists friends.

I have no interest in becoming a peon in their globalist world order.

I can't express how happy I am she did not win.

It'll keep going for a couple of months to influence the mid terms and not in a good way for the Republicans. Milk it out milk it out