Why Trump Tweets

When I talk to Trump-haters, invariably the first thing they cite against him is his tweets. And, in truth, they have sometimes been impolitic. But on the whole, I think Twitter has helped him. This Associated Press news story illustrates why.

President Donald Trump’s attorney said Friday the special counsel in the Russia probe has narrowed the scope of potential questions for the president, even as Trump advanced an unverified theory that the Justice Department planted a spy in his 2016 campaign…

It comes from the New York Times, so, yeah, it’s unverified.

…and is now “out to frame him.”

That’s true. Much of the article deals with Rudy Giuliani’s negotiations with Bob Mueller, which I will skip.

His comments came after Trump sent out an early morning tweet that seemed intended to undercut the ongoing Russia investigation, which he has repeatedly called a “witch hunt.”

Promoting a theory that is circulating in conservative circles, Trump quoted Fox Business anchor David Asman and tweeted: “Apparently the DOJ put a Spy in the Trump Campaign. This has never been done before and by any means necessary, they are out to frame Donald Trump for crimes he didn’t commit.”

Everyone who pays attention knows that the Hillary Clinton campaign colluded with unknown (and possibly fictitious) Russians, through the Perkins, Coie law firm and Fusion GPS, to fabricate smears against Donald Trump. On the other hand, it is clear that neither Mueller nor anyone else has evidence that anyone in the Trump campaign (unlike Perkins, Coie) colluded with Russians. And, while the details are still unknown, it is blindingly obvious that the FBI, and in all likelihood the CIA, not only spied on the Trump campaign but colluded with the Clinton campaign to spread the lies that were generated by the Clinton campaign through Fusion GPS.

Of course, the AP has never reported any of this. To them, it is “a theory that is circulating in conservative circles.”

Last week, the National Review raised the question of a possible FBI spy on Trump’s campaign.

Since when does the AP report on National Review articles?

The article cites work by Rep. Devin Nunes, an ardent Trump supporter and head of the House intelligence committee…

Don’t listen to Nunes, he is an “ardent Trump supporter!”

…who has demanded information on an FBI source in the Russia investigation.

What’s funny is that the AP, having introduced the fact that an FBI informant spied on the Trump campaign as “a theory that is circulating in conservative circles,” now more or less admits that it appears to be true:

The New York Times reported separately this week that at least one government informant met several times with Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, both former foreign policy advisers on Trump’s Republican campaign. The newspaper attributed the information to current and former FBI officials.

In a tweet Thursday, Trump cited the National Review article suggesting that the FBI source was really a “confidential informant in the campaign.”

“If so, this is bigger than Watergate!” he tweeted.

If true, it is 1,000 times bigger than Watergate. But until now, wild horses couldn’t have pulled the facts that have been steadily emerging about the real scandals of the 2016 election out of the AP. Why does the AP grudgingly cover them now? Because they were tweeted by President Trump. Democratic Party outlets like the Associated Press know that millions of people understand quite a bit about the brewing Obama FBI/CIA/Fusion GPS/Clinton campaign/FISA scandal–not just the eggheads who read National Review, but the great many who follow the president on Twitter, or see accounts of his tweets elsewhere. More than anyone else, it is President Trump who has stood up to the swamp in the person of Bob Mueller, and is forcing the Democratic Party press to begin covering the real story of the 2016 election.

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.