Mueller’s warning–and Hanson’s

Last week I linked to the McClatchy story by Peter Stone and Greg Gordon reporting that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has evidence that Michael Cohen — President Trump’s personal lawyer — visited Prague in the summer of 2016, just as it says right there in the dodgy Steele Dossier. Cohen to the contrary notwithstanding via Twitter (below), the response to this story among political journalists and other observers was nigh on ecstatic.

Mueller’s office has not responded directly to inquiries regarding this story, but the Daily Caller’s Chuck Ross and Peter Hasson have obtained this warning from a Mueller spokesman: “What I have been telling all reporters is that many stories about our investigation have been inaccurate. Be very cautious about any source that claims to have knowledge about our investigation and dig deep into what they claim before reporting on it. If another outlet reports something, don’t run with it unless you have your own sourcing to back it up.” The rest of the Ross/Hasson story is worth reading as well. Their current story follows up on Ross’s April 14 Daily Caller story (noting Jake Tapper’s confirmation of the McClatchy story).

Victor Davis Hanson has an even more salient warning of his own in “Colluders on the loose.” I think that should probably come with an exclamation point for emphasis. It’s is a warning that applies especially to Mueller’s office. They’re lookin’ for collusion in all the wrong places.

“If there is a crime of collusion,” Dr. Hanson writes, “then Clinton-campaign contractors should be under investigation for seeking Russian help to find dirt on Trump, to spread smears around throughout the DOJ, FBI, and CIA, and to make sure that the dirt was leaked to the press in the final weeks of the campaign — for the sole ‘insurance’ purposes of losing Trump the election.” Dr. Hanson has many other tips for Mueller in this invaluable column making a number of points we have been trying to make here in our own way.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses