Russia are you Listening? The Last Press Conference and is Collusion Hiding in Plain Sight?
A very interesting interview last night for Ali Melba subbing for Rachel Maddow last night.
He interviewed former Watergate Prosecutor Nick Ackerman-who has since been assistant attorney of NY
From what Ackerman said there is a pretty strong prima facie case for obstruction of justice-which is obvious but also for collusion.
And when you think about it, Trump more or less told us in the Last Press Conference. He stated it: Russia are you listening? Hack her email server.
Now some have tried to hand wave this away as a joke. Some joke. So, this would go to the matter-as so much would in this case-of intent. Is it reasonable to think this was a joke or that it was quite serious?
One notable aspect right away-this was his last press conference of the campaign, so his own campaign team didn’t find it very funny. They knoew perfectly well how it sounded.
This is something else the media has missed. In a December edition of Meet the Press Chuck Todd and his guests were talking about how Hillary Clinton was not available to the press-you know like Donald Trump. They really did say this.
I think someone on the show pointed out that Trump actually stopped doing pressers at the end and someone else-I think it was Amy Cooke dismissed this-‘Yeah, but that was our impression that he was more transparent.’
Typical media-what they perceive is more important than the truth. For the record, while Trump never gave another presser after Russia, are you listening? Hillary beginning in September gave numerous press conferences.
Still, the media continued to insist that Trump was the more accessible one during the campaign. Cooke’s glib-‘Well we didn’t really notice that at the end’ kind of says it all. They had this narrative that Trump was transparent because he gave pressers and Hillary wasn’t because she didn’t and when the facts changed on it, the narrative didn’t.
The news that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is also looking into obstruction of justice is very bad news for Donald Trump-as well as potentially many others like Jared Kushner and Roger Stone. You have to love Roger Stone-he’s actually been leaning into the idea that he spoke to Trump about firing Comey.
Trump denied-belatedly after suggesting the opposite-that he spoke to Roger Stone about firing Comey. And Stone then gives a non answer that makes it sound like he did speak to him.
It’s as if to get the notoriety he thinks is his due, Roger Stone is willing to be convicted.
But one bone I have to pick is with the many people who say-Ok, this whole collusion charge remains a hazy thing. But clearly there is obstruction of justice. Trump fired the man investigating him and said it was about Russia to Lester Holt.
That is true on the obstruction of justice front-we have pretty clear prima facie evidence of that. Much more than with Nixon even who at least wasn’t so stupid or crazy to just glibly admit to these things on Twitter and on tv.
Has any case ever contained so much prima facie-publicly available and clear evidence? Meanwhile Trump’s Twitter account is a ‘gold mine of information for investigators.’
But my bone is those who while now admitting the clear evidence of obstruction still insist that the underlying charges are hazy.
First of all, the phrase ‘It’s not the crime it’s the coverup’ never made a lot of sense intuitively. Think about it-why would an innocent person engage in a criminal coverup? At the very least that is almost criminally stupid. .
What I’d like to ask the collusion skeptics is what do they need to see? What would count to them as proof beyond a signed confession that lays out all the specifics with the signature?
I mean Trump basically colluded that day-which is why he never did another presser the rest of the campaign. We have Roger Stone’s ‘back channels’ with Wikileaks-was Sean Hannity his intermediary? Was it Nigel Farage?. We also have Roger Stone’s tweets with Guccifer 2.0.
Not just the tweets that are public knowledge where Stone asked Guccifer 2.0 to RT his Breitbart article claiming the election would be ‘rigged’ for Donald Trump. But we now know that Stone also got to see Dem voter files complements of Guccifer 2.0.
Guccifer 2.0 also passed on the files to Florida GOPer Alan Nevins. Surely this public knowledge is just the tip of the iceberg of Stone’s conversations with Guccfer 2,0, Julian Assange, and others. And surely Stone and Nevins are just the tip of the iceberg of GOP operatives who worked with Guccifer 2.0.
Or should we say coordinated? Then we have the issue of Jared Kushner and the Columbia Analytica data mining and microtargeting. The stolen voter files enabled Trump to target with great precision Democratic voters.
Remember Trump’s gratitude to Black voters-Thank you for not voting.
A big part of Trump’s strategy was negative turnout-convince the Berniecrats to stay home, disgust people with the entire process-‘A pox on all your houses.’
In that vein, Colin Kapernick’s public comment-Who cares? One of them is a racist the other’s a liar.
Uh, who cares because Jeff Sessions ok? Because of the current voter fraud task force ok? Because civil rights now has to deal with a segregationist in at the DOJ, alright?
What exactly do these collusion skeptics need to see? If this is not collusion what is?
Some seem not to understand what this means. You get some who have dismissed it all-Who cares? All the Wikileaks emails were true, so what’s the complaint?
Because process matters. Because we have laws and rules as to what information becomes public whether it’s true or not. Like in a public court room you hear the words ‘prejudicial’ bandied about. That something is true doesn’t mean you have the right to release it publicly.
And it was grossly unfair-why not release all Trump’s information? Clearly there was a political agenda, not the work of a ‘apolitical transparency advocate’ as Julian Assange pretends to be.
And we now know that some information was fraudulent. In the French election false info was leaked about Macron. In the US, Comey-in what is completely surreal-did that presser based on a fake Russian hacked document. Why you would base it even on a real document you got from Russian hackers is not clear.
Finally, people who say that what was done is not a crime need to study up. Don Segretti went to jail for the Canucks letter. A fun fact-Roger Stone was the 19 year old driver who hand delivered the Canucks letter toe the Manchester Union Leader.
P.S. As we saw in my poll out last week, the long awaited poll results are in, and right now I’m just 11 points down vs. Peter King (GOP-NY-District 2). And the voters don’t even know who I am yet.
There is nothing more important in getting answers to Trump-Russia collusion than a Democratic House in 2019. Please donate to help me in my part of the effort to fight for a Dem House.
Thank you. We must have a Dem House. And so, we will.