The collusion confusion

Last week I tried repeatedly to make these points, but they bear repetition and here is Marc Thiessen making them from inside the great fog machine of the Washington Post itself:

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.

Please pass it on.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line