MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace unleashed an ugly verbal assault on President Trump in the wake of Attorney General William Barr’s press conference.
The “Deadline: White House” host struggled to cope with Barr acting as a “human shield” for the president in Thursday’s press conference in which he reiterated the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation report that there was “no collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia in the 2016 election.
(MSNBC video via Media Research Center)
“This was an investigation, at its core, about Donald Trump’s daily – sometimes hourly – assault on the rule of law in this country,” Wallace said as she unloaded her pure hatred for the president of the United States.
“As the country’s chief executive, he sat in his pajamas watching ‘Fox & Friends’ maligning the FBI, maligning Robert Mueller, maligning Rod Rosenstein,” she continued.
She turned her wrath on Barr, joining her many colleagues on the left, like CNN, who can’t grasp that the collusion delusion is over.
“So Bill Barr didn’t walk into that room with the scale at zero. Rule of law had a deficit because Donald Trump had been kicking it in the teeth for 22 months. And what the country’s Attorney General did was walk in there and back up the guy doing the kicking,” Wallace claimed.
“So the question for me now turns to, why? Why?” she demanded.
“Do you have an answer for that?” veteran MSNBC reporter Brian Williams asked his colleague.
“I don’t,” Wallace responded, but wasn’t done ranting.
“But it goes back to the obstruction memo. I mean, did they just happen to pick a guy, who just happened to have so much free time, that he just happened to write a 19-page memo saying that a president couldn’t obstruct justice, and that Robert Mueller, who you described, I’m sure accurately, as his friend, should never, ever be able to query the President on the topic of obstruction?” she went on.
“There will be a strong wave of trying to bully the press, saying, ‘It’s over! It’s over! No collusion, no obstruction,'” she warned.
“Really? Then why did that all happen today? Why have we heard from Barr five times if the Mueller report is so awesome for Donald Trump?” she asked, and continued asking.
“We have now heard from someone who is a human shield of Mueller’s findings five times. If Mueller exonerated Trump on collusion, if there’s nothing ugly in there, why have we heard from Barr five times?” Wallace ranted in exasperation.
Her theories earned plenty of laughs on social media.
Put a fork in it…Nicole…your credibility is toast.
— Silver Sneekers (@Ms_S1954) April 18, 2019
How delusional and embarrassing…. her tinfoil hat is pretty thick.https://t.co/nwxAfrxtMy
— Rebecca Ann (@BecksOfBucks) April 18, 2019
All @NicolleDWallace can say is “why” without an answer. Why? Because there isn’t an answer Nicolle. You’re just wrong.
— schoolpaper (@schoolpaper1) April 18, 2019
In another segment, Wallace echoed CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin’s theory that Trump is guilty simply because he was “frustrated” by an investigation that took so long.
Happy people don’t obstruct justice. Trump’s frustration at leaks and investigation are evidence of guilt, not innocence. But let’s see the report . .
— Jeffrey Toobin (@JeffreyToobin) April 18, 2019
“We know it wasn’t a criminal conspiracy with the Russians, but then what was it? Because Robert Mueller spent 22 months looking at it, and if there was nothing, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have taken 22 months to say nothing,” Wallace declared.
.@NicolleDWallace: “We know it wasn’t a criminal conspiracy with the Russians, but then what was it? Because Robert Mueller spent 22 months looking at it, and if there was nothing, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have taken 22 months to say nothing.” pic.twitter.com/UfP9CzDuhN
— David Rutz (@DavidRutz) April 18, 2019
She was deservedly roasted on Twitter.
Time investigating equals guilt. Makes sense
— Richie (@Richie_Sloth) April 18, 2019
I think the term is “nothing burger”.
— Chuck Millirons (@Millirons) April 18, 2019
— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) April 18, 2019
So that’s the new standard? If there’s a lengthy investigation, it must mean the target of the investigation is guilty?
— Fake Noose (@LetItBurnUSA) April 18, 2019
“The fact there was an investigation proves he was guilty.”
Sure. Go with that.
— The Truth Hurts (@FactSmacker) April 18, 2019
Isn’t this one of the lines you’re supposed to say to get out of jury duty?
— Captain Tenneal ????? (@TLarsen2) April 18, 2019
The duration of the investigation proves the guilt of the target of the investigation.
— Razor (@hale_razor) April 18, 2019
Ha ha ha, beautiful
— Some guy tweeted something ??♂️ (@jtLOL) April 18, 2019
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- ‘Are we next?!’ Kilmeade breaks down shady FBI actions, concludes Trump justified in his outrage - August 30, 2022
- Grandfather throws down with aggressive kangaroo that attacked his dogs, but who really won? - June 4, 2022
- ‘My name is Dr. Robinson’: Proud abortionist snaps at Chip Roy calling her ‘Miss’ during hearing - May 19, 2022
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.