Bret Stephens on Smearing Mueller: ‘They Want Jesse Watters to Investigate’ Trump


Over the past few weeks, there has been a concerted effort in conservative media — specifically Fox News — to smear and discredit Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his probe into Russian election meddling. Over the weekend, the noise surrounding President Donald Trump potentially firing Mueller reached a fever pitch after a Trump transition lawyer claimed Mueller “unlawfully” obtained transition team emails. For his part, the president said he wasn’t considering canning Mueller, though he did say his people weren’t happy.

This afternoon on Deadline: White House, MSNBC contributor and New York Times columnist Bret Stephens addressed Fox’s anti-Mueller narrative and how it has “infected mainstream normal Republican circles.” Bringing up complaints from the GOP that Mueller may be on a fishing expedition against Trump, the conservative writer stated he was “old enough to remember” that Bill Clinton got impeached for lying about an affair and not land deals in Arkansas.

This then led Stephens to discuss Republican criticism that Mueller’s investigation and team is full of anti-Trump bias.

“So what is the standard now going to be — the only people that can investigate the president are the lackeys of the president?” Stephens asked. “So the only people who can investigate the president are people whose staff has been vetted to make sure that even in their most intimate exchanges, no anti-Trump comment has been made?”

Host Nicolle Wallace interjected, asking for a name while suggesting that perhaps Republicans and conservative media would be satisfied with former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.

“This is — they want Jesse Watters to investigate the president,” the NYT columnist responded, bringing up the pro-Trump Fox News host. “This is what we’re down to.”

“I think that’s right,” Wallace noted.

Watch the clip above, via MSNBC.

[image via screengrab]

Follow Justin Baragona on Twitter: @justinbaragona

Have a tip we should know?

Filed Under: