Did you know that there have been over 30 people indicted by the special counsel Robert Mueller? This is the new talking point from the left to explain why Mueller's investigation has not been either a witch hunt or a waste of resources. There must really have been collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia if 30 plus people got indicted, right?
WRONG. It doesn't take much time to realize that nearly all of the indictments have been issued against Russian individuals who will never, NEVER, be arrested, tried or convicted. Mueller had only to issue the indictments with the expectation that he could have a nice public relations talking point. He didn't have to PROVE anything, let alone beyond a reasonable doubt. Indeed, two of the Russians indicted were corporations. One didn't even exist at the time when it supposedly was involved with hacking the DNC. It was formed many months after those events. A second corporation really threw Mueller's team a curve; it sent a lawyer into American court to contest the propriety of the indictments. Instead of going ahead with that indictment, Mueller sought a postponement from the court. When the judge refused, Mueller was faced with the prospect of having to come forward with actual evidence that the company had been involved with wrongdoing. The indictment died. The reality is that all of the indictments of Russians by Mueller are meaningless; they certainly don't indicate collusion with the Trump campaign. These indictments don't even mention such collusion.
But what about Paul Manafort? He's been indicted three times by Mueller. Of course, the key here is that the allegations against Manafort have nothing to do with the 2016 election. In other words, Mueller dredged up old charges against Manafort in order to pressure him. These three indictments show nothing about collusion with Russia.
But how about the guilty plea by General Flynn? Again, this is a plea for allegedly lying to the FBI. Flynn has said that he pled guilty in order to stop the enormous cost of defending himself. Now it turns out that Mueller's team didn't even meet their obligations to turn over all exculpatory evidence to Flynn's lawyer. The FBI agent who conducted the interview in question said in his report that there was "no indication" that Flynn had lied in his interview. So Flynn may withdraw his guilty plea at some point and seek dismissal of the indictment for clear misconduct by the special counsel's office.
That leaves only two indictments. The first is of Rick Gates who functioned as Manafort's assistant. His indictment also has nothing to do with the 2016 election. It's a rehash of the same stuff for which Manafort is being accused. The second is of Maria Buttina, a Russian who is accused of not registering as an agent of Russia. That may sound like she didn't register as a spy, but it actually means that she was working for Russian entities in dealing with the government but that she allegedly had failed to file the registration papers required for such representation. It's hardly a major crime, and once again, it has nothing to do with any collusion regarding the 2016 election. Most of her dealings were with the Obama Administration and the Federal Reserve Bank. One has to wonder why, if this is such a big deal, the Obama Justice Department didn't indict her.
So there you have it. There have been no indictments regarding collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016. There have been a series of show indictments issued for public relations purposes against various Russians. There still is, however, no proof of any sort of collusion.
The left needs a new talking point.
WRONG. It doesn't take much time to realize that nearly all of the indictments have been issued against Russian individuals who will never, NEVER, be arrested, tried or convicted. Mueller had only to issue the indictments with the expectation that he could have a nice public relations talking point. He didn't have to PROVE anything, let alone beyond a reasonable doubt. Indeed, two of the Russians indicted were corporations. One didn't even exist at the time when it supposedly was involved with hacking the DNC. It was formed many months after those events. A second corporation really threw Mueller's team a curve; it sent a lawyer into American court to contest the propriety of the indictments. Instead of going ahead with that indictment, Mueller sought a postponement from the court. When the judge refused, Mueller was faced with the prospect of having to come forward with actual evidence that the company had been involved with wrongdoing. The indictment died. The reality is that all of the indictments of Russians by Mueller are meaningless; they certainly don't indicate collusion with the Trump campaign. These indictments don't even mention such collusion.
But what about Paul Manafort? He's been indicted three times by Mueller. Of course, the key here is that the allegations against Manafort have nothing to do with the 2016 election. In other words, Mueller dredged up old charges against Manafort in order to pressure him. These three indictments show nothing about collusion with Russia.
But how about the guilty plea by General Flynn? Again, this is a plea for allegedly lying to the FBI. Flynn has said that he pled guilty in order to stop the enormous cost of defending himself. Now it turns out that Mueller's team didn't even meet their obligations to turn over all exculpatory evidence to Flynn's lawyer. The FBI agent who conducted the interview in question said in his report that there was "no indication" that Flynn had lied in his interview. So Flynn may withdraw his guilty plea at some point and seek dismissal of the indictment for clear misconduct by the special counsel's office.
That leaves only two indictments. The first is of Rick Gates who functioned as Manafort's assistant. His indictment also has nothing to do with the 2016 election. It's a rehash of the same stuff for which Manafort is being accused. The second is of Maria Buttina, a Russian who is accused of not registering as an agent of Russia. That may sound like she didn't register as a spy, but it actually means that she was working for Russian entities in dealing with the government but that she allegedly had failed to file the registration papers required for such representation. It's hardly a major crime, and once again, it has nothing to do with any collusion regarding the 2016 election. Most of her dealings were with the Obama Administration and the Federal Reserve Bank. One has to wonder why, if this is such a big deal, the Obama Justice Department didn't indict her.
So there you have it. There have been no indictments regarding collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016. There have been a series of show indictments issued for public relations purposes against various Russians. There still is, however, no proof of any sort of collusion.
The left needs a new talking point.
No comments:
Post a Comment