Ben Shapiro: How the Russia Investigation Helps Trump

[Catholic Crusader]

Ben Shapiro: How the Russia Investigation Helps Trump
source link

QUOTE:
This week, for the first time in months, a generic ballot poll showed Republicans beating Democrats in the midterm elections. According to Reuters, Republicans are now leading by six points. And while that poll is obviously an outlier, the movement of the generic ballot in the direction of Republicans isn't: The average lead for Democrats has been dropping steadily since late February, from a nine-point lead to a four-point lead.

Why?

Certainly, the economy has something to do with it: The job market continues to boom; the stock market continues to hover around 25,000; and GDP continues to grow steadily. And, certainly, foreign policy has something to do with it: There are no catastrophic foreign wars on the horizon, and President Trump's gutsy calls to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem resulted in zero serious backlash.

Democrats opposed the Trump tax cuts and have whined incessantly about Trump's Middle East foreign policy, even going so far as to demonstrate a certain level of warmth toward terrorist group Hamas. This isn't exactly brilliant politicking.

But there's another reason Democrats seem to be dropping like a stone, too: their Russia obsession. The reality is most Americans think the Russia investigation is going nowhere. As of early May, just 44 percent of Americans though the FBI special counsel investigation of President Trump and his associates is justified; fifty-three percent thought that the investigation is politically motivated. Three-quarters of Americans think Trump should cooperate with the probe, but Americans are skeptical that there is a there there

And so far, Americans have been right. Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation has resulted in indictments of Trump associates on a charge of lying to the FBI, but there have been no indictments related to the original brief of his investigation: election collusion with the Russians. Meanwhile, each day seems to bring new headlines regarding the extent of the FBI investigation, dating all the way back to mid-2016. Americans aren't going to read all the details of the various stories — they're just going to take away that law enforcement was all over the Trump campaign, has come up with nothing thus far and continues to hound the Trump White House.

Furthermore, Democrats are getting discouraged. They were promised a deus ex machina — an alien force that would swoop in to end the Trump presidency. They hoped it would be Mueller; they were convinced the election was stolen. It wasn't, and it's unlikely Mueller will end Trump's presidency.

So when Trump fulminates about the supposed sins of the "deep state," few Americans are exercised. Most shrug; some even nod along. Democrats seethe but have no new fodder for their ire — and every day that passes with the media chumming the waters and coming up empty drives down enthusiasm even more. And Trump's focus on Russia means that he spends less time tweeting about other topics — which helps him, since he's less likely to make a grave error on those fronts.

If Mueller truly has nothing, there's a serious case to be made that the Russia collusion investigation actually helped Trump more than it hurt him. And Democrats might just have to come up with a plan for dealing with Trump's policies other than praying for an avenging angel to frog-march him from the White House

 

[rexlunae]

That was months ago. You should check out a more recent poll about the generic ballot.

In any case, we won't know for sure until November. I think the obsession with polls is a little silly, but I suspect that ripping children from their parents will not reflect well on Republicans.

 

[ok doser]

That was months ago. You should check out a more recent poll about the generic ballot.

In any case, we won't know for sure until November. I think the obsession with polls is a little silly, but I suspect that ripping children from their parents will not reflect well on Republicans.

i'm confident that by November the dems will have managed to shoot themselves (collectively) in the foot in a manner that pales besides any traction they might have gotten from trump's evil abuse of brown children

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Ignore the spin — still no evidence of Trump collusion
BY JONATHAN TURLEY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 07/13/18 05:15 PM EDT - source link

“They caught the witches.” Those were the celebratory words of John Podesta, chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, in response to the indictment Friday of 12 Russian military intelligence officers for hacking efforts linked to the 2016 election. Only hours before, President Donald Trump repeated his favorite mantra, calling the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller a “rigged witch hunt.”

Trump always has been wrong about the Mueller investigation, which many supported after he fired then-FBI Director James Comey. As this investigation once again proves, there be witches in those woods. The question, however, is the type of witches we were hunting.

The problem with hunting witches is that you can quickly forget what sent you on the hunt, or gradually view most everyone as a witch. In Salem, Mass., in 1763, Mary Easty was convicted by deranged girls yelling “O Goody Easty, O Goody Easty, you are the woman.” That was it. Witch

The problem in the Russian investigation is that we have plenty of crimes but not necessarily plenty of colluders.

The demonic Internet character Guccifer 2.0 was a carefully constructed false identity of a hacker, who turned out to be Russian intelligence officers. Before we all shout “O Goody Ruskies,” we should keep in mind the distinction between criminals and colluders. Trump is correct that none of these indictments have established any crime linked to collusion by himself or his key aides. That does not mean that the investigation is rigged or improper.

After 14 months of investigation (and for the second time in a formal indictment), the Justice Department has stated that it is not alleging any knowing collusion between Trump campaign officials or associates and the Russians. Back in February, Mueller handed down his major indictment of 13 Russians for actively interfering with the 2016 election by spreading false information. Both Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein expressly noted that the evidence involved “unwitting” communications with Russians adopting false identities. This indictment shows that same pattern of clearly concealed identities in seeking to hack and distribute email information from the Democratic campaign and its associates.

When I noted at the time of the February indictment that it was strikingly silent on evidence of collusion, some insisted that the indictment did not cover the hacking operation and that Mueller was likely waiting to indict Trump officials colluding on the theft and distribution of the emails. We are still waiting. While the indictment speaks of both a reporter and a Trump campaign associate unwittingly communicating with the Russians, the indictment does not allege knowing collusion. That does not mean that no one colluded on some level, but after 14 months we have yet to see compelling evidence of collusion by Trump or his campaign.

There are some individuals who, according to media reports, may have sought hacked material from WikiLeaks. There also is an unnamed journalist who sought such information, and even an unnamed candidate for Congress. That does not mean, however, that it is a crime for reporters or academics or political activists to review such information if they did not play a role in illegal removal. Indeed, numerous journalists, including at least one reporter for The Hill, sought access to Guccifer 2.0’s information.

Moreover, the efforts of the Russian operations detailed in these indictments do not establish a particularly significant impact on the election. When the Russians began this operation in 2016, we were already irreconcilably divided as a nation between the two least popular candidates ever to run for the White House. Thirteen trolls in St. Petersburg, or 12 military hackers in Moscow, certainly could spit into that raging ocean, but it remains highly unlikely to have had a material impact on the election.

As for the information shared by the Russian units, it is was rather underwhelming even to the recipients. For example, Guccifer 2.0 sends a Trump associate what is described as “the turnout model for the democrats entire presidential campaign.” The Russians were eager to help, even saying in similarly stilted language, “please tell me if i can help u anyhow … it would be a great pleasure to me.” However, the recipient simply responds that the information is “pretty standard.”

Indeed, much of this effort may have been much too “standard” for some of us to admit. The continued shock and revulsion expressed by many leaders at the thought of such interference is a tad forced. The United States has intervened in foreign elections for decades, including leaking stolen documents. Not long ago, our hacking of our own allies, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, was revealed. Many nations regularly try to influence elections and this is nothing new for the United States, either as the culprit or as the target of such efforts.

In other words, if there were a real hunt for election witches, we would find ourselves at the head of the line to the pillory.

Does that mean that the Mueller investigation is somehow invalid? Of course not. This remains an attack on our system, there is still work to be done, and we should all want the FBI to continue that work unimpeded.

With minutes of its release, the latest indictment was unrecognizable after being put through the centrifuge of the Washington spin machine. The fact is that the indictment largely confirmed what we knew. It shows an effort by the Russians to undermine Clinton and influence the election; it also shows no evidence of knowing collusion and, indeed, very limited evidence of unknowing collusion.

So, ignore the exclamations of “O Goody Ruskies.” We can be outraged by the Russian operation without being hypocrites as to our own history. Likewise, we can support the Mueller investigation without ignoring the fact that no credible evidence has thus far arisen against Trump on collusion.

In other words, if you want to find witches, start by not being chumps

 

[intojoy]

Everything going according to plan comrades

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Catholic Crusader]

i'm confident that by November the dems will have managed to shoot themselves (collectively) in the foot in a manner that pales besides any traction they might have gotten from trump's evil abuse of brown children

Yep. They are over-playing their hand and just can't stop

 

[rexlunae]

i'm confident that by November the dems will have managed to shoot themselves (collectively) in the foot in a manner that pales besides any traction they might have gotten from trump's evil abuse of brown children

That would be true to form, but it's hard to imagine what could be as evil as the Boko Haram act Trump pulled.

 

[Rusha]

That was months ago. You should check out a more recent poll about the generic ballot.

In any case, we won't know for sure until November. I think the obsession with polls is a little silly, but I suspect that ripping children from their parents will not reflect well on Republicans.

My concern is that Russians have been given the greenlight to interfere AGAIN. We already know that Comey and Putin handed the election to Trump. Decency will determine the next election ... as in "it's not okay to lock away babies and children in cages".

 

[Ktoyou]

My concern is that Russians have been given the greenlight to interfere AGAIN. We already know that Comey and Putin handed the election to Trump. Decency will determine the next election ... as in "it's not okay to lock away babies and children in cages".

If you wish to impinge on Trump, then, in November, vote for a democrat, even if you like the Republican more. We need to restore Congress back to the powers intended by the Constitution!

This is what is broken, the Executive has too much power, one President should not be able to make and enforce tariffs on other countries. That should be a legal decision, by our lawmakers, not a man with a big stick!

 

[Ktoyou]

Going back to Roosevelt, we have gradually given the President more and more power. It was supposed to be for WWII> Not given to Nixon, Reagan, who I liked, or Bush, the first I liked, and the goofball Bush 2, and now the nutcase, Trump

 

[rexlunae]

If you wish to impinge on Trump, then, in November, vote for a democrat, even if you like the Republican more. We need to restore Congress back to the powers intended by the Constitution!

This is what is broken, the Executive has too much power, one President should not be able to make and enforce tariffs on other countries. That should be a legal decision, by our lawmakers, not a man with a big stick!

Totally right. Full Presidential systems like ours are rare because they tend to devolve into authoritarianism. Even most monarchies gave up the unitary executive who was also head of state. We've been largely lucky, up to now.

 

[Rusha]

If you wish to impinge on Trump, then, in November, vote for a democrat, even if you like the Republican more. We need to restore Congress back to the powers intended by the Constitution!

This is what is broken, the Executive has too much power, one President should not be able to make and enforce tariffs on other countries. That should be a legal decision, by our lawmakers, not a man with a big stick!

Oh, I will. The only way to save our country is to get Trump and his co-conspirators out of office. Trump's priority is not the American people ... and it doesn't matter how much the little guy loses with these tariffs because it won't *personally* affect him.

 

[Ktoyou]

Totally right. Full Presidential systems like ours are rare because they tend to devolve into authoritarianism. Even most monarchies gave up the unitary executive who was also head of state. We've been largely lucky, up to now.

Really lucky up till now, but this Trump is what Lindsey Graham rightly called crazy and said a crook like Clinton would be safer.

Then when trump won the election, Graham went off that message and supported Trump! I would hope I had the guts to not express a favorable view. I think Paul Ryan played it chicken to just bow out , stating it was for family, when I am sure he could not deal with Trump!

 

[Ktoyou]

Oh, I will. The only way to save our country is to get Trump and his co-conspirators out of office. Trump's priority is not the American people ... and it doesn't matter how much the little guy loses with these tariffs because it won't *personally* affect him.

Yes, it is like when we should have stopped Hitler at Munich.

 

[rexlunae]

Really lucky up till now, but this Trump is what Lindsey Graham rightly called crazy and said a crook like Clinton would be safer.

Then when trump won the election, Graham went off that message and supported Trump! I would hope I had the guts to not express a favorable view. I think Paul Ryan played it chicken to just bow out , stating it was for family, when I am sure he could not deal with Trump!

I've long thought we should consider moving toward a system where the president is head of state, but has a more limited role in setting up a government. It's interesting, if you read Federalist 47, you get the impression that Madison thought the president wouldn't actually run the departments he oversees, which kinda contradicts the dictatorial presidency some advocate.

 

[Ktoyou]

I've long thought we should consider moving toward a system where the president is head of state, but has a more limited role in setting up a government. It's interesting, if you read Federalist 47, you get the impression that Madison thought the president wouldn't actually run the departments he oversees, which kinda contradicts the dictatorial presidency some advocate.

I agree with Madison and Jefferson in the Federalist papers. Was not Jefferson even more fir states rights? It has been many years since I read it.

 

[rexlunae]

I agree with Madison and Jefferson in the Federalist papers. Was not Jefferson even more fir states rights? It has been many years since I read it.

He may have been, although Jefferson is also well-known for the rather dramatic contradictions in his life.

Although, he wasn't involved in the Federalist Papers. Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay.