8 thoughts on “The Russian Collusion Hunt”

  1. And since her password (itself a restricted piece of information) was given to someone else, that is a violation of the espionage act.

    Now, why the UN ambassador should have the authority in any case to unmask data like that is another issue….

  2. I’ll believe the tables truly have turned when I see indictments. Until then; I’m nearly as pissed by the GOP enabling of this gross injustice of illegal spying of citizens as the Obama Administration performing it. I’ve seen nothing but talk, and such talk suggests the lesson for DC is to do better hiding this in the future.

    1. The last two years have been a convincing demonstration that the people inside the Beltway need outside intervention because they seem to be operating under a different rule system, one where they are immune to prosecution for incredibly serious felonies, ones that make Watergate look like a low-rent burglary.

      I recall that one Congressman explained that he and all his colleagues are terrified of kicking off actual prosecutions because they don’t know how far the legal vengeance cycle will go or how it would end up.

      Now if I was a member of a large organization whose members were afraid to call the police because they might all end up in jail, I would take that as a sign that I am apparently a member of a criminal organization. But that’s just me.

      1. I recall that one Congressman explained that he and all his colleagues are terrified of kicking off actual prosecutions because they don’t know how far the legal vengeance cycle will go or how it would end up.

        Apparently it goes pretty far for the occasional politicos that dare attempt to participate first hand in our federal government election process. I’d say it should at least go as far for others in the federal government. Sort of like what happens to a sailor for exposing classified information should happen to a member of the President’s Cabinet. I would say that Article II of the Constitution protects a President from exposing classified information unless prosecuted via impeachment.

    2. Yup!

      This can’t be swept under the rug. The Democrats and Republicans need their faces rubbed in it. The truth needs to come out and people need to go to jail. Trump can then hand out select symbolic pardons for an olive branch.

  3. I’ve been saying for a very long time that the unmasking is the key.

    Samantha powers denies doing it, but it bears her name. So, two possibilities; she’s lying, or she’s telling the truth. My hunch is the latter.

    I think the pivotal questions will be, #1, exactly what was done with the data, which surely included campaign strategizing? Who was this data given to? (I think the answer is it ended up in the Clinton camp).

    #2, who did it? Who could unmask in the name of the US ambassador to the UN? I think we’ll find that there was only one person with the power and ability, the president.

    As for whether this will be prosecuted, I suspect it will. It’s in Trump’s interests to make it happen, no matter what it takes. Not only is it in his political interests, but his personal interests; they tried to destroy him, and his kids as well. I doubt he’ll be inclined to turn the other cheek and give them another shot.

  4. The problem here is why hasn’t this stuff already been addressed? Much of it has been sitting around for years.

    My take is that the fact it’s still untouched indicates no indictments will be on their way for this class of problem unless some outsiders get hard evidence of criminal activity (something much more credible than the Steele dossier for sure).

    1. It hasn’t been addressed because the coup plotters have been in control of the DOJ and have been shielded by the SC claiming obstruction if the corruption was rooted out. How many statutes of limitation ran out over the course of the SC investigation?

Comments are closed.