tailgater wrote:Funny. But not.
I was never a big fan of the Ken Starr investigation.
Not sure how it impacted the Clinton POTUS day-to-day stuff because it was page two material at best during most of the digging.
So here we are again.
Only much worse.
Not because of the evidence of malfeasance, but because it's a 24 hour news cycle with predominantly anti-Trump beliefs.
And here's the thing:
You'd think that a democrat would recall the BS from the Starr investigation and temper the enthusiasm and hyperbole.
Instead it's like a revenge scheme, with newly discovered smoking-gun-dujuors whenever the previous slam-dunk fizzles to nothingness.
Which makes it entirely more divisive and lower class.
Trump hasn't even been charged with anything, and may not.
Clinton was answering questions before a panel of overly moral vigilantes (all of whom later admitted to or were outed as unfaithful husbands) and all was on TV. All under oath.
Perhaps you were too young to stay up for the 11:00 news? I was probably older than you are now when it was happening. But a claim of insider info aiding a real estate transaction in which Clinton LOST 200K ended up as a BJ nearly 3 years later. And he was impeached. You're correct, there is no comparison, but you have it backward. It was yuuuge news.
How far has Mueller drifted compared to that? Oh, that's right, we don't even know yet because it hasn't been completed yet. It's actually not in the news as quotes from Mueller.
But you're outraged over my truth in jest remark?
When it comes to too much news coverage on Trump, the real big investigation is still Mueller and he says very little on the front page, or about anything still ongoing. However, Trump says a lot, disparaging remarks everyday that make the news. Perhaps if he would just shut up for a while there'd be less coverage in the media...?