Democratic Party operatives are desperately trying to keep their Russia narrative alive. Thus, this CNN headline: “US Officials: Info suggests Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians.”
Sounds like a blockbuster, right? Only the story contains no actual news.
The FBI has information that indicates associates of President Donald Trump communicated with suspected Russian operatives to possibly coordinate the release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, US officials told CNN.
The “US officials” are Democrats, likely Obama administration holdovers, embedded in the federal bureaucracy. They are the same leakers we have been hearing from for months now, as they work feverishly to undermine the Trump administration. CNN, their collaborator, is trying to undermine the Trump administration, too.
Note that this lead paragraph says nothing at all. What does “to possibly coordinate” mean? It means that there isn’t any evidence.
The FBI is now reviewing that information, which includes human intelligence, travel, business and phone records and accounts of in-person meetings, according to those U.S. officials. The information is raising the suspicions of FBI counterintelligence investigators that the coordination may have taken place, though officials cautioned that the information was not conclusive and that the investigation is ongoing.
Which is more or less what Comey said on Monday. CNN chooses to say that “the information was not conclusive.” But as far as we know, there is no information at all.
This lament is pretty funny:
One of the obstacles the sources say the FBI now faces in finding conclusive intelligence is that communications between Trump’s associates and Russians have ceased in recent months given the public focus on Russia’s alleged ties to the Trump campaign.
There isn’t any evidence in past communications, and now they aren’t communicating at all, damn them! The Democrats in the bureaucracy and at CNN are grasping at straws.
I suppose it is possible that Russia’s rulers didn’t want Hillary Clinton to win the election. But why? They were delighted when Barack Obama was elected, and Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, carried out a foreign policy that was either pro-Russia or supine. And Hillary turned over a large portion of the U.S. supply of uranium to Russia. Putin and his cronies could hardly have hoped for more. Beyond that, why Vladimir Putin would want to help elect a candidate who promised the biggest military buildup since the Reagan administration has yet to be explained.
This puzzles me, too: we are asked to believe that someone from the Trump campaign conspired with someone from the Russian government to influence the 2016 presidential election, and the best scheme they could come up with was to hack into Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s email account. And leave behind signals that the intrusion was done by Russians. Seriously?
Someday the FBI’s investigation–in which, by the way, I have little confidence–will be closed. In the meantime, “news” outlets like CNN will do everything possible to smear the Trump administration so that if and when the investigation fizzles out, the damage intended by Obama holdovers in the bureaucracy will have been done.