Wall Street Journal Fake News: "Voters Want Impeachment"

-edited

Democrats Should Unify Behind AOC, Not Pelosi claims the Wall Street Journal. Yeah Right.

A WSJ op-ed by Cenk Uygurs claims Democrats Should Unify Behind AOC, Not Pelosi.

Despite AOC's preposterous $78 trillion proposal to save the world from global warming in 12 years claim, one can arguably make a demographic case for it.

However, the subtitle has a pure fake news quality.

Fake News: "Voters Want Impeachment and a Progressive Policy Agenda".

That's the WSJ's actual subtitle.

Mueller's Testimony

Hello Uygurs. Can you read?

Even that bastion of liberalism known as the Washington Post understands Mueller’s Testimony Crystallized Public Opinion Against Impeachment.

​WSJ Poll on Impeachment

Only 39% of Democrats Support Impeachment

Not Even Progressives Support Impeachment

The above images from Support for impeachment falls as 2020 heats up.

Who's to Blame?

Does one blame the writer or does one blame the WSJ for publishing obvious manure under the guise of opinions?

Uygurs is entitled to his preposterous opinions. Opinions are just that.

But the subtitle "Voters Want Impeachment and a Progressive Policy Agenda" is fake news the WSJ is willing to publish for whatever reason.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments (32)
No. 1-10
Jcbl
Jcbl

I don't know who the resident lefty is that's writing headlines/sub-heads for the opinion page but whomever it is needs some guidance....or perhaps a position at CNN.

Casual_Observer
Casual_Observer

It's not over yet until the Dems get an unredacted report. Whatever was blacked out likely contains something worse than we know. I was a Trump voter but there is little doubt in my mind there was collusion.

Blurtman
Blurtman

Young Turk Cenk is just marketing himself. It's not an editorial, but an advertorial.

Carl_R
Carl_R

It is worth pointing out that the Washington Post story you linked to, "Mueller’s Testimony Crystallized Public Opinion Against Impeachment." ends with the conclusion that Democrats "... should have the courage of their convictions, push the matter forward and end this sorry moment in our history one way or the other."

FelixMish
FelixMish

Slow news day. Mish, you might back down on the click-baiterizer.

It's "Opinion"! There's no reason to expect opinion to be factually correct. And, anyway, the sub-head is factually correct. There do exist voters who want ... well, you name it.

Too, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that the crew at the WSJ would love for the Democrats to rally behind AOC. Jeez, reading the right wing sites, you get soaking wet from the salivation in prospect of this.

Harbour
Harbour

Uygurs is a putz.

AshH
AshH

My theory is that Pelosi is saving impeachment for Trump's 2nd term in the off chance he gets reelected (currently, he's trailing badly behind Biden in the polls). The House could easily impeach today, but there's a 0.001% probability that the Senate would actually remove him from office. Until then, just run the clock out. No need to waste the big ammo yet. Besides, at the rate he runs his big mouth, they might have better ammo in 18 months.

Casual_Observer
Casual_Observer

As I previously posted, let's let Congress see the unredacted Muller report and grand jury testimony. Trump would probably be toast if the Republicans actually had a viable candidate but the truth is there are links to Russian oligarchs with McConnell and other Republican leaders too. The money trail leads to not a good place for Clinton, Trump or other long -standing leaders. This is why the only people clamoring for impeachment are the new Democrats. They have no clue how dirty the system is in Washington and how compromised by Russia and Saudi Arabia long standing political leaders are. Ehud Barak traveled with Clinton to Epstein's island. If the leaders of countries are pedophiles, it isn't a stretch to think that Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama (less so) weren't compromised at some level. Trump is no different. Until we get a leader that reveals the level of transgressions that have occurred, we won't have transparency. But then there is that saying about power corrupting. Trump isn't who he claims to be and is/was hated by many mainstream politicians but that doesn't make him any better.

Casual_Observer
Casual_Observer

By the way, I'm not an AOC supporter but didn't Trump want to burn the house down a few years ago ? Maybe eventually we will get someone that does unseal and unredact everything and make it public. But Trump isn't that guy.

Tater-Man
Tater-Man

How many years are the Dems going to waste trying to litigate the 2016 election? If they were serious about getting rid of Trump (they are not) -- they would need a more viable candidate. AOC the socialist? Pelosi the briber?

Years ago, people joked that Dan Quayle was George Bush's insurance policy. Anyone who even thought about charging Bush with something was asked what they thought about the phrase "President Quayle". The same joke was applied to Bill Clinton's impeachment proceedings. Al Gore? You can't be serious.

While she had plenty of help from both parties, Nancy Pelosi is part of the corrupt and useless political class that bankrupted the country in the first place. We can't solve a problem by repeating the mistakes of the past.

Socialism causes economic suffering, always and everywhere it has been tried. Each con artist promises this time will be different, but it never is. Bernie and AOC will cause economic suffering, especially if they promise otherwise.

Trump can't be removed unless there is a viable alternative. There isn't and we all know it.