The BBC's opinion on the "dossier" that the Russians can blackmail Trump is not as its charter declares "fair and balanced"
I was listening to a so called political journalist state "Whether this dossier is real or not, Trump is irreparably damaged...."
When Hillary's emails were leaked proving that she lied under oath. They never said she was damaged.
When Podesta's emails were leaked showing the behind the scenes collusion with the MSM. They never said she was damaged.
When Veritas showed the under cover videos of the democrats fixing votes against Berni Sanders and arranging riots at Trumps rally's, they ... you get the picture.
The BBC has spent more air time on unproven Russian interference in the American election than all the above. Since when did speculation trump facts? (could not resist)
Obama's past has been of limits to journalists. Those who did do some digging and found very interesting facts, could not get their articles published.
Obama himself had his past sealed by court order. That was a red rag to a bull for some investigators.
This is a long article because the research has been thorough. If you do not have time to read it all, scroll down to the Columbia university section, about two thirds down.
Obama claimed to have spent two years there but there is no photo of him in any of the year books and none of the students and teachers said he was in any of their classes.
The piece on how he got elected president of the Harvard Law Review is eye brow raising, along with his and Michelle's supposed student loans.http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaEducation.htm
You have to ask why did Obama get a pass and Trump an autopsy?