Losing the election does not exculpate Hillary Clinton from her collusion with the Russians



As you probably well know, Robert Mueller filed his first indictments yesterday. There is more sizzle than there is steak. Paul Manafort and Richard Gates were indicted on charges having nothing to do with collusion or the Trump campaign, but rather having to do with their lobbying efforts on the part of entities in the Ukraine. Also indicted was George Papadopoulos, a low level Trump volunteer who fell into the Scooter Libby trap- he lied about doing things that were entirely legal.

One of the charges brought against Manafort and Gates was failing to register as a foreign agent:

The offense of failing to register as a foreign agent (Count Ten) may be a slam-dunk, but it is a violation that the Justice Department rarely prosecutes criminally. There is often ambiguity about whether the person’s actions trigger the registration requirement, so the Justice Department’s practice is to encourage people to register, not indict them for failing to do so. It may well be that Manafort and Gates made false statements when they belatedly registered as foreign agents, but it appears that Mueller’s office has turned one offense into two, an abusive prosecutorial tactic that flouts congressional intent.

It should be noted that Tony Podesta, the brother of John Podesta, who worked with Manafort for the same client, also failed to register under FARA. Podesta resigned from the Podesta group and dissolved the company – as though he knew something is coming. Podesta also is said to have mislead Congress about the extent of his Ukraine lobbying efforts:

One of Washington’s most powerful lobbying firms did not disclose the wide extent of its lucrative political work for a Ukrainian group tied to both onetime Trump adviser Paul Manafort and to pro-Russian politicians, new records show.

The firm, the Podesta Group, said nothing in a 2012 lobbying report to Congress about at least 32 meetings, emails and other communications it had with the State Department, at a time when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was scrutinizing Ukraine’s upcoming election, records show.
The new disclosures shed light on the web of contacts between Russian-leaning Ukrainians, Washington lobbyists and U.S. policymakers during the Obama administration. The Podesta Group filed new, detailed lobbying disclosures in April to augment lobbying reports from 2012 to 2014 that had given little detail.

A reasonable person could expect that Podesta will face charges similar to those filed against Manafort. The Mueller investigation is beginning to look like a crusade against those lobbying for foreign interests. The case against Manafort is not the strongest and there is nothing to implicate Trump:

From President Trump’s perspective, the indictment is a boon from which he can claim that the special counsel has no actionable collusion case. It appears to reaffirm former FBI director James Comey’s multiple assurances that Trump is not a suspect. And, to the extent it looks like an attempt to play prosecutorial hardball with Manafort, the president can continue to portray himself as the victim of a witch hunt.

There would likely be no case against Manafort had he not joined the Trump campaign:

Even from Paul Manafort’s perspective, there may be less to this indictment than meets the eye — it’s not so much a serious allegation of “conspiracy against the United States” as a dubious case of disclosure violations and money movement that would never have been brought had he not drawn attention to himself by temporarily joining the Trump campaign.

It has been speculated that Papadopoulos, who Mueller described as a “pro-active witness”, might have been wearing a wire and the left wing media went orgasmic over the possibility. Its usefulness is dubious as he was no longer part of the campaign by the time he was arrested.

The great intoxication in Leftworld yesterday has given way to a more calm sobriety. The disappointment in a lack of evidence against Trump is palpable. While this still leaves many questions unanswered, there is much we now know about democrats and their collusion with the Russians.

We know for a fact that hillary clinton and the DNC used the same smear merchant Putin used to assail Segei Magnitsky:

Here’s the bottom line: We have congressional testimony, under oath, that Clinton hired the same firm to smear Trump that Putin reportedly used to smear Magnitsky. Moreover, we also know that the Fusion GPS dossier relied on senior Russian government officials for much of the dirt it compiled, including “a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” and a “former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.” Together, those are bombshell revelations.

Yet today, there is barely a peep in the mainstream media about the Clinton-Fusion-Putin connection. Imagine the outrage that would have ensued if we had learned that Trump had hired an opposition research firm with Putin-linked clients to dig up dirt on Clinton and that senior Russian government officials had been the sources of the unsubstantiated allegations that were leaked to the media. The left would be screaming, “Smoking gun!”

None of this absolves the Trump campaign of collusion charges. But there is now more public evidence about Clinton’s collusion with Russia than there is about any such collusion by Trump.

We know for a fact that hillary and the DNC paid $9 million for phony dirt on Trump that came directly from the Kremlin. obama seems to have chipped in another million. Apparently Putin, like Jonathan Gruber, depended on the stupidity of the American democrat.  Not even Steele believed it. But this is real collusion. The fact that Putin intentionally spread phony dirt on Trump is pretty much proof that he had no desire for Trump to win the election.

We know that obama knew about Russian election meddling as far back as 2015, and did nothing about it. Was that part of his promise to be “more flexible” for Putin? Or was it because he knew the Russians were going to try to damage Trump’s campaign?

Then there are things we don’t know.

Why was ownership of 20% of US uranium stocks to Putin even allowed?

Did the FBI notify CFIUS about the Russian money laundering and bribery scheme that they knew about before the sale was approved by the obama administration?

Why did the FBI sit on the bribery/money laundering scheme that surrounded the sale? Why were the charges watered down?

What is the real story about Uranium One?

Who is blocking the investigation?

Who authorized the DNC paying Fusion GPS?

Who authorized the Clinton campaign paying Fusion GPS?

How is it that Bill Clinton got $500,000 for a cup of coffee from a bank in Russia AND the sale of 20% of US uranium to Putin was approved AND more than $100 million flowed into the Clinton Foundation all at the same time?

If not Samantha Powers, who unmasked all the Trump campaign staff?

Why is it that when the Trump campaign (maybe) seeks dirt on Hillary from the Russians but gets none it is collusion but when Hillary and the DNC pay the Kremlin $9 million for dirt on Trump it’s mere opposition research?

A special prosecutor is warranted to answer these questions.

The fact remains that only one candidate paid $9 million to a foreign national and eventually to Russian operatives for dirt on the opposing candidate- dirt that came directly from the Kremlin. And the then-President paid another $1 million. There was definitely collusion between one candidate and Vladimir Putin and it wasn’t Donald Trump.

When you bring this up to liberals, they complain that it is not relevant because Clinton lost, as though losing means exculpation. It does not.





0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Crouching Jackass Hidden Bear

Imagine the outrage that would have ensued if we had learned that Trump had hired an opposition research firm with Putin-linked clients to dig up dirt on Clinton and that senior Russian government officials had been the sources of the unsubstantiated allegations that were leaked to the media. The left would be screaming, “Smoking gun!”

We don’t have to imagine it; the left has imagined it for us. This is EXACTLY how they are reacting to their phony, fabricated collusion accusations against Trump, EVEN THOUGH their heir apparent, who LOST, was committing the very acts of criminal collusion, violating election laws along the way, they pretend to be outraged over.

Why was ownership of 20% of US uranium stocks to Putin even allowed?

To further artificially prop up struggling “green” industries that have extensive liberal financial backing.

There is No Crime on the US books called “Collusion.”
Collusion with Russia is NOT a crime.
Only time collusion even has a slight criminal tinge is related to organized criminal money laundering.
However, beyond mere collusion Hillary’s money laundering brought $9-12 million to Fusion GPS via her lawyers from her campaign and the DNC, & that is criminal activity.
Also, Hillary’s camp sought to create and use a FICTIONAL dossier to slander her opponent.
That is libel and/or slander.
The pushing of this FICTIONAL dossier as a basis for wiretapping of Trump officials is also CRIMINAL.
Later, the unmasking of so many Trump officials by Obama’s team to the WaPo/NYTimes was CRIMINAL.
So, there’s plenty of statutes broken that Hillary’s loss to Trump do nothing to erase.
She, and those around her, all need to be investigated and, where appropriate, charged then prosecuted.

@Nanny G: Means…. ends. Everything is OK.