The long awaited Special Councel's report cleared the Donald and his campaign of any collusion with Russia during the 2016 election campaign. And it did so in language that is going to make it hard for the Dems to keep gnawing on this particular bone, which is now starting to look like a left-wing conspiracy theory. The issue of obstruction of justice was left open. But with the SC citing insufficient evidence, I think impeachment is off the table at least for now.
All of which said, there are multiple other investigations still under way, at both the Federal and state level. So Trump is not out of the woods by any means. But this was the big one. This was the investigation that the left was almost salivating in anticipation of its findings. And to put it mildly, it was a big fat nothing burger. The state investigations are being run by nakedly partisan Democrats. So unless they uncover something absolutely damning and incontrovertible they will be open to charges of partisan prosecution.
All in all Trump dodged a bullet and while I am no fan, I can forgive him taking a little victory lap on Twitter and maybe enjoying one of those well done steaks he is so fond of for dinner.
The Infant God
5 hours ago
11 comments:
He did not "dodge a bullet." These were hysterical, illogical accusations.
If James Comey, Paul Brennan and other senior Executive branch officials are not investigated or prosecuted for colluding with the Clinton campaign to generate a false dossier to obtain FISA warrants to try and get dirt on Trump in order to influence the election, then they will have "dodged a bullet," in the generally understood sense of that metaphor.
As I have told many a Democratic friend, don't get ahead of yourselves. That is, all we have right now is Barr's summary of Mueller's report. Barr reports that Mueller found insufficient evidence to charge a federal crime, but not necessarily that Mueller found no evidence whatsoever. There also seems to be some question as to whether that conclusion is primarily based on the DOJ's current rule that a sitting President cannot be indicted, which may then shield all those acting on the President's behalf. The fact so many Republicans (appointed by Trump!) believed there to be probably cause to investigate says something, as does the judicial approval by the FISA courts (which were told the dossier was funded by political opponents - and has not been proven 'false' - and had more to go on than that). It is also clear that a lot of the probable cause was due to the fact Russia was aggressively meddling in our election and targeting the Trump campaign for potential partners. Being targeted as potential conspirators by hostile actors isn't a crime, but lacking sophistication and experience enough to recognize it and immediately report it to the FBI place some level of blame for the need for an investigation at the feet of Trump and his campaign. And besides, Mueller is quoted as saying explicitly: "While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him." Again, this could all be perception and naivete. It could also be he gets dinged for the cover-up and not the crime. That's what did McCabe in - lying about things he had every right to have done as Acting Director (i.e., give stories to the press). I, for one, am glad Mueller did not do what Comey did: Mueller, from what we know of his report, has not editorialized on anything not directly related to whether he believes there is enough to indict. If you can't/won't indict, no comment is made in a system where all are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Trump is just as incompetent and unfit for office today as he has always been. Indictments and convictions aren't required to recognize that, and it's why we have elections (and Presidential term limits).
https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/screw-you-losers-our-narcissistic-corrupt-racist-anti-science-transphobic-sexist-classist-nationalistic-serial-lying-adulterer-president-didnt-collude-with-russia-to-help-win-an-already-gerrymandered-election
Trump Derangement Syndrome
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cb/6d/98/cb6d98987107792822e882fa5ae46183.png
Mention was also made of "information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices." Don't be surprised if other U.S. Attorneys and States AGs are already investigating additional potential crimes that go beyond the narrow mandate of the Special Counsel's remit, not to mention investigations by the House and the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee.
Not being indicted is a win only for those expecting indictment to have been a real possibility.
It could be TDS or sour grapes on what you believe to be the merits, but it could also be you didn't realize McSweeney's is a satire site.
A clear-eyed view from the Left: http://coreyrobin.com/2019/03/25/thoughts-on-russiagate-mueller-and-trumps-prospects-for-reelection/
Yes, there are other investigations ongoing. The state investigations are being run by rabid Democrats who have all made it clear they are looking for grounds to indict. If they don't have video of Trump torturing a puppy almost anything they do is going to look like politically motivated abuse of power.
The Federal investigations could be a threat. We don't really know what they are looking for or at.
Agree on Feds. I wonder if/when Trump and his supporters will realize that accepting a pardon, including for himself, is an admission of guilt.
Facts are a funny thing. A large majority of Republicans thought Nixon was innocent right up until the end. That was only because of the tapes, though, so you are probably right. Even then, Trump wasn't far off regarding his comment regarding his supporters and shooting someone on Fifth Avenue in NYC - quite something for a "Law & Order" politician and party.
The fact investigations are being led by "rabid Democrats" is about as relevant as noting "rabid Republicans" are as adamant in looking the other way and refusing to investigate. Actual indictments and convictions are very different, though. Think about the highly partisan investigations of Hillary; they do wonders for the base but not even the most "rabid Republican" was able to find grounds to actually indict, even by a grand jury.
None of that will change the political calculus Trump is making, though. Barr's letter makes it clear he is applying the DOJ's rules around indicting a sitting President liberally and kicking the responsibility for any next steps to the House. So, he didn't really take a position on guilt/innocence; he just didn't feel the DOJ could indict (based on DOJ rulings) or get a conviction. They are putting the onus on the political branches to risk the rout Republicans faced in 1998 for impeaching Clinton if they feel there is clearly enough evidence to convict or not, on the merits and given the politics. Pelosi has been signalling for quite some time she doesn't think there is, at least not yet.
And, in the second inning, Democrats tie it up, 1 to1..
Post a Comment