The Russian Government is just another American political Super-PAC. That’s the reality behind Robert “Sergeant Schultz” Mueller’s determination that, when it comes to whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russians to influence the 2016 election, “I see nothing, nothing.” There was never anything to see. The closest the gang that couldn’t collude straight came to actual conspiracy was when Donald Trump, Jr. blurted out, “I love it!” when blessed with the vision of carting Russian-supplied Hillary dirt upstairs to Daddy. Others involved in the suspected conspiracy, such as Jerome Corsi, escaped indictment. Have you seen Jerome Corsi? It would be like indicting Clarence the Angel. The other alleged conspirator –more likely, conspirator wannabe – is Roger Stone. Have you seen Roger Stone? He could have played Judge Doom in “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?”
In the post Citizens United era, unspoken collusion drives American politics. Super PACs are permitted to spend exorbitant sums on behalf of candidates as long as their efforts are “not coordinating” with the campaign. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert demonstrated the absurdity of modern campaign finance reality when Colbert declared his candidacy for the Presidency and Stewart ran his Super PAC to avoid “coordination” between the two. In one of the best civics lessons in history, they demonstrated how laughable the “no coordination” rule is.
You don’t need “wink, wink” subterfuge to circumvent the “no coordination” rule. Common purpose is sufficient. If two entities are on a parallel track to an identical goal, what need is there of coordination? The media spent too much effort looking for “collusion,” which is not the issue. This is: why do Trump and Putin pursue the same goals? Why did Putin value Trump’s election as much or more than Trump did? Putin acted like a Super PAC, spending money and effort in support of Trump without “coordinating” with him. He stated his support of Trump at the infamous Helskinki summit. Trump has supported Putin’s goals, such as undermining NATO, supporting Brexit, praising anti-Democratic leaders and fomenting a trade war within the Western Alliance. Trump has met with Putin one-on-one, sometimes with only Russian interpreters present, and confiscated his interpreters’ notes of the meeting. Trump has a common purpose and opaque relationship with the President of Russia. What’s in it for Vladimir?
Attorney General William Barr summarized Mueller’s findings in a report as long as an average Christmas letter and about as interesting. He said Mueller did not establish a conspiracy with Russia and didn’t decide whether Trump obstructed justice.
Barr wrote, “As the report states: ‘[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.’” It will be interesting to read how this sentence begins, since Barr left out everything before “(T)he.” And “not establishing” that an act occurred is not the same as proving it didn’t. Mueller’s finding is not “exoneration.” Barr admits Russia wanted to conspire with Trump: “(T)he Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts,” wrote Barr, “despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.” Who were those individuals and who did they reach out to and why? What made the Russians think their outreach would work? Do we know for certain it didn’t? After all, when Donald, Jr. exclaimed “I love it” when offered Russian dirt on Clinton, what better indicator is there that the Trump campaign will say yes to anything? Who needed “coordination” after a bat-signal like that?
Richard Nixon’s greatest act of public service was to tape-record himself committing felonies. That gave us direct evidence of criminal, impeachable offenses. Trump does not use email and rarely puts anything in writing. He speaks in a coded language that conveys intent without leaving evidence. Mueller apparently determined that, absent direct evidence like the kind Nixon provided, he could not state a case of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Trump cauterized himself like a good Don and escaped liability.
Mueller, the loyal soldier, could not bring himself to exonerate his Commander-in-Chief on the question of obstruction of justice. As Barr wrote, “The Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.’” Mueller left possible obstruction for Congress to evaluate within its impeachment power. Barr, however, tried to short-circuit that by stating, “the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent…” He added each of these elements “would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” In other words, he doesn’t believe a jury would convict Trump of obstruction. That is why prosecutors decline to prosecute; they hate to lose. Barr was also showing loyalty to a boss who hired him because of his disdain for the Mueller probe and who could fire him if he didn’t defend Trump from Mueller. Barr said Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein agreed with him. Rosenstein previously demonstrated weaselness when he wrote the phony letter supporting Trump’s firing of James Comey. Rosenstein doesn’t want to jeopardize his pending retirement. Remember Andrew McCabe?
Three days after Barr’s letter to Congress, Trump is taking a victory lap, Junior is making Pornhub references in support of his Dad, and the Administration is working to take away health care from millions and kneecap the Special Olympics. What a glorious time to be corrupt!
Meanwhile, there is no serious effort to prevent Russian meddling in American elections, including the Presidential election in 2020, Russia shows no signs of stopping, and money is rolling in to the Trump election effort. The unanswered question remains: who, exactly, is our President working for?
© 2019 by Mike Tully
Be First to Comment