Wolf Blitzer, Liar: CNN Lynching of Herman Cain Gets More Intense Every Day

Yep. I doulc not believe it. Wolf Blitzer, today, admitted that the CNN LYNCHING of Herman Cain is getting "more intense" by the day.


Hacker Boy (hacking into this disgraceful blog in ther interst of turth, and simple humanity, despite Skipe's totally seculative allegations that I am connected with Rupert Murdoch, and what Skip calls the "unfair and unbalanced network"--as to which I will admit that the mainstream media paid MORE attention to the alleagtins against Murdoch and his company than to allegations against Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Anthony Weiner, Barack Obama, and the Obama Administration): "Skip, you KNOW that you are toally misrepresenting what Blitzer said today. He did NOT "admit" that CNN is conducting a "lynching" of Herman Cain. What he SAID was that the Cain "scandal" gows "more intense" every day."


Skip: Thank you, Hacker Boy. As I am sure you realize, but do not care, I deliberately provoked you to "corredt" me. Yep., Good old LIAR Wof, on The Liar Network, did say that this Herman Cain matter is becoming "more intense" every day (hyping the CNN ATTACK in Wolf's program today, whichb I did not wait aound to see). To me, this does constitute an ADMISSION that CNN is conducting a LYNCHING of Herman Cain.


Why do I say that? It is because waht Blitzer actually said is an obvius LIE. There is still "no eviidence" against Cain, and the meida attempts to CONCEAL this fact are becoming mroe desperate. Today's attempt to keep the sotry "alive' was the release of a LAWYER STATEMENT, purporting to be the ANONYMOUS statement of the "accuser' of Herman Cain. At least, I don't think the name of the "accuser" has been released, and if it has the media is UNINTERESTED in SCRUTINY of HER.


Now, again, I was a Texas trial lawyer for more than 30 years. What does the JUDGE tell every JURY in a jury trial (at least in all of my trials, here in Texas): "What the lawyes say is NOT EVIDENCE. You hear the evidence in SWWORN TESTIONY and documentary deivdence I allow to be admitted into evidence. YOu are required to decide the case based on the EVIDENCE, to whihc you apply the law as iI give it to you. The lawyers are here to present the evidence, and suggest what view you should take of the eivdence, but what they say is NOT evidence." (emphasis, of course, being added by me).


Make no mistake. When a LAWYER realeases a "statement", it is the LAWWYER'S STATEMENT, and would not be accepted as evidence in any honest court in this land. Of course, the mainstream meida is NOTHONEST. Nope. It is the lwayer's statement, even if it were totally in the HANDWRING of the person (unless, of course, the laweyr released the PRIOR STATEMENT making the original "allegations", in chishc case it would seil be a LAWYER STATEMENT--total hearsay--but would at least clarify what hearsay "allegations" were originally made).


But how does the above make Wolf Blitzer a LIAR (which, of course, I have long ago proven he is, but which I assert he has proved again)? So CNN is asserting specualtion, hearsay and innuendo, and being totally unfair to Herman Cain. Does this make it a LIE to say that the "heat" on Herman Cain is becoming "more intense" every day?


Yes, ti does. Becuase the ONLY thing that is becomong "more intense" every day is the DESIRE of Wolf Blitgzer and CNN to LYNCH Herman Cain (to bring him down, if youo do not like this figuratvive use of "lynch"). The actual "pressure' on Herman Cain is WANING. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a fact. Even CNN is not doing nearly the kind of "wal-to-wall stuff they wre dong in the first few days. Sure, the entire purpose of this SPECULATIVE lynching is to try to put out MILTIPLE WAVES of unfiar news stories. Thus, if actual WITNESSES come forward and present themselves to SCRUTINY, that will prompt a NEW WAVE of media hysteria (not, you can be sure, really CHALLENGING the "witnesses"). But that is for the future, and a truly DAnGEROUS thing for CNN.


You will remember that my older daughtter, the OBAMA voter in Boston and big city LAWYER, was TIRED of this non-story two days ago. At some point, this LUNCHING becomes obvious. Itt already reached that point with my daughter some time agon, and CNN attmpts to make this "more intense" every day (what else could Wolf mean but that CN fully intends to do that), will merely make ti OBIVOUS that CNN is conducting a LYNCHING. More importantly, for CNN, the "vieweres" (all 100 of them) are going to TUNE OUT (as my daughter is obviusly doing). CNN cannot afford to lose what few viewers it still has.


Nope. What Wolf Blitzer said is a LIE. Unless NEW allegations, based on something more than anonymous sources, come out, this story is WANIGN. And it will continue to wane. You know my advice to Herman Cain: STOP TALKING and let the sotry wane. The other Republican candidates, although not doing what they should do (atttack the mainstream media for being UHNFAIR to Herman Cain, even while acknowleding that they do not know what happened all of those years ago, are "IGNORING THE ISSUE" (in the depressed words of the RACISTS at Yahoo, AT&T and the Associated Press, as that was the desparing AP headline featured today on AT&T/Yahoo, in an obvious attemppt to try to both push Repubican candidatges and "tar
them with "guilt by association" and refusal to condemn). There is really noting new to add to this "story". It cannot help but wane, without much more FEUL. All Herman Cain has to do is say that this is a nothing story, and that is is time to start again talking aoubt IMPORTATN things. As I have shown, the unfiar and unbalanced network (the most watched) had BETTER start backing off (and they are, subejct to proving me right by joining the mainstream meida again if more allegations, or an actual accuser, do surface).


By the way, I think it is OBVIUS taht the meida can FIND OUT the name of the "accuser" that is the main perosn making "allegations" againt Cain (anonymously) . The media hs shown no hesitancy in being UNFAIR to Cain, including putting uot AnONYMOUS "charrges". Exactly why, again, is the ACCUSER freem from scrutiny? ON the unfair and unbalanced network, for example? No, there is no percentage in Cain revealing the name. Btu the media is CONCEALING a material fact here, and oing it deliberately (without, really, adequate cause). Sure, the "accuser" WANTS to attack fro the shadoes, but she does nto have a RIGHT to dot that. I continue to regard this as EVIL stuff from the mainstream media (this practive os putting out ANONYMOUS attacks from the shadoes, and CONCEALING the surces of the attacks) .


Wolf Blitizer, is a liar (and racistr) on The Liar Network (and Ehe Racistt Network, which is a title CNN earned in this blog well before Herman Cain).


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).