Russia investigation

Was it a hack or a leak? (3) [with comment by Paul]

Featured image Salon has a good column summarizing the argument presented by Patrick Lawrence in the Nation asserting that the alleged Russian hack of the DNC email was rather an inside job. It nicely complements our previous installments in this series. Author Danielle Ryan quotes the official DNC response to Lawrence’s Nation article provided to the Nation after publication and now appended to the article: U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded the Russian »

Collusion gone missing

Featured image The latest Washington Post collusion story is different from the others. The story is “Trump campaign emails show aide’s repeated efforts to set up Russia meetings.” Last night Paul Mirengoff summarized and and deconstructed the story here. If you’ve been following the collusion hysteria, you won’t want to miss this story. The story comes in the accustomed form — under the byline of numerous Post heavy hitters (Tom Hamburger, Carol »

Was it a hack or a leak? (2)

Featured image Last week I noted Patrick Lawrence’s article on the the purported hack of the DNC email by the Russians in the run-up to last year’s election. Lawrence reported on the analysis presented by former intelligence officials who assert it was something else entirely. Lawrence’s article was posted under the heading “A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack.” Lawrence’s article includes relevant links. The analysis has been »

Trump campaign repeatedly rejected efforts to set up Russia meetings

Featured image The Washington Post reports that in 2016, a new member of the Trump foreign policy advisory committee sent emails to the Trump campaign urging that the candidate meet with top Russian leaders including Putin, but that the campaign repeatedly rejected this suggestion. The Post’s report is based on emails that it says were “read to The Post by a person with access to them.” The foreign policy adviser in question »

Was it a hack or a leak?

Featured image Yesterday the Nation posted Patrick Lawrence’s article on the the purported hack of the DNC email by the Russians in the run-up to last year’s election. Lawrence reports the analysis by former intelligence officials who assert it was something else entirely. Lawrence’s article was posted under the heading “A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack.” The “report” comes in form of open letters to the president »

More on the leftist judge who approved Mueller’s grand jury

Featured image Beryl Howell is the judge who signed off on Robert Mueller’s request to convene a Washington, D.C. grand jury, and who apparently will continue to “umpire” disputes over the grand jury’s work (which, in reality, is Mueller’s work). As I discussed earlier today, Howell served for ten years as a staffer for Sen. Patrick Leahy, the hyper-partisan leftist. An unnamed Washington lobbyist assured the Daily Beast that Judge Howell has »

Ex-Leahy staffer provides judicial oversight for Russia investigation

Featured image The Daily Beast reports that Judge Beryl Howell is the jurist who signed off on Robert Mueller’s request to convene a Washington, D.C. grand jury for the Russia investigation. It also says that, going forward, Howell “will be the umpire-in-chief: deciding whether or not Trump allies’ lawyers can quash subpoenas, and whether or not people like Jared Kushner can invoke what’s known as executive privilege to get out of testifying »

Mueller impanels Washington, D.C. grand jury

Featured image The Wall Street Journal reports that Robert Mueller has impaneled a grand jury in Washington, D.C. A grand jury has already been impaneled in Virginia to investigate Michael Flynn and his work in the private sector on behalf of foreign interests. The new grand jury apparently will focus on Russia and the 2016 election and, quite possibly, on claims of obstruction of justice. The existence of the D.C. grand jury »

Today in collusion [with comment by Paul]

Featured image President Trump thinks he can talk his way out of any situation or tight spot. He is not unique in thinking truth no obstacle. He seems to have thought he could help Donald Trump, Jr. talk his way out of the embarrassing New York Times story on the June 16 meeting of Trump Jr. et al. last year with Natalia V. et al. in search of incriminating information on Hillary »

Epstein’s assessment

Featured image Edward Jay Epstein is the author of several books on Soviet/Russian intelligence-related matters including Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald, Deception: The Invisible War Between the KGB and the CIA, Dossier: The Secret History of Armand Hammer and, most recently, How America Lost Its Secrets: Edward Snowden, the Man and the Theft. In the July 1974 Commentary essay “Did the press uncover Watergate?” Ed correctly deduced the identity »

Full of Schiff

Featured image Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff has made himself a leading purveyor of the “collusion” hysteria with which we have been inundated since the election. Schiff is the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, but he must be tired of life in the House of Representatives. He avidly wants to move on up to the Senate. Every day it becomes clearer that the “collusion” hysteria is more a »

Getting a fix on Fusion GPS

Featured image The so-called Trump Dossier appears to be something like the Rosetta Stone that will allow us to decipher the true story underlying the Trump/Russia “collusion” hysteria. The hysteria has been driven by the Democrats and their media adjunct to explain the shocking outcome of the 2016 election. Ishmael Jones argued the fraudulence of the Trump Dossier here on Power Line yesterday. The FBI apparently thought the Trump Dossier was the »

The beleaguering of Jeff Sessions

Featured image Last week President Trump complained on the record to New York Times White House reporters Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman about Attorney General Jeff Sessions. Trump expressed profound dissatisfaction with Sessions’s recusal from investigations related to the 2016 presidential campaign. Sessions’s recusal covers what is now the Special Counsel investigation under the direction of Robert Mueller. I read Trump’s remarks to be an (unsubtle) invitation to Sessions to resign. Trump »

Today in collusion

Featured image In his interview with three New York Times reporters yesterday — an interview most notable for the dissatisfaction he expressed with Attorney General Sessions on account of his recusal from the Special Counsel investigation — President Trump was asked if the investigation would cross a red line if it expanded to look at his family’s finances beyond any relationship to Russia. “I would say yes,” Trump responded, though he would »

Trump throws a good man, and a good AG, under the bus

Featured image Most of us understand, I think, that President Trump lacks class and self-discipline. Still, I would not have expected him to rip Jeff Sessions, his Attorney General, in an interview with the New York Times, of all organs. If Trump is this unhappy with Sessions, then fire him. Or accept his resignation, which Sessions reportedly offered after the last time Trump popped off about him. But don’t whine to Maggie »

Mr. Trump regrets

Featured image President Trump has given a wide-raning interview to New York Times reporters Peter Baker, Michael Schmidt and Maggie Haberman. The Mueller investigation is on his mind in a big way. President Trump observes: “Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else” (audio below). The President further characterizes »

Mona Charen: It’s not a witch hunt

Featured image My friend Mona Charen has sent me the following response to my nearby post “A witch hunt?” In my post I comment on her recent column “16 Things You Must Believe to Buy the ‘Witch Hunt’ Russia Narrative.” I want to give Mona the last word in this exchange and thank her for her response. Mona writes: Before plunging into your objections, Scott, I want to thank you for being »