House Committee says NO COLLUSION; Networks say NO STORY “Russian Collusion” has become as mythical as “Global Warming.”

Home  »  Conspiracies  »  House Committee says NO COLLUSION; Networks say NO STORY
Print This Post Print This Post
Mar 13, 2018 No Comments ›› admin

By Lynn Woolley

Isn’t it interesting to note that the least little story that points to some possibility that somewhere, somehow, someone associated with Trump may have met with someone that somehow, somewhere may have had some connection with Vladimir Putin is always the lead story. It makes the front page. CNN convenes panels.

But if a story is about a lack of collusion between trump and the Russians – or collusion with the Hillary Clinton campaign – the story is ignored or buried.

Representative K. Michael Conaway of Texas, right, last month in Washington. Credit Jacquelyn Martin/Associated Press

So color me NOT surprised that when the Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee rendered a verdict of no Trump collusion, the big networks yawned and CNN did its own anti-Trump spin.

In these times, anything that accrues to the benefit of Trump is non-news, but anything that might destroy him becomes panel time on CNN and front-page headlines in big-city featurepapers.

“Russian Collusion” has become as mythical as “Global Warming.”

Mythical not in the sense that it didn’t happen; we still don’t know the final answer to that. But rather in the sense that it has attained mythical proportions – and still it’s not been proven.

Video: Congressman Mike Conaway with FOX’s John Roberts on end of HIC probe

So Russian Collusion is the NEW Global Warming.

Here’s why: if there is no global warming, then there’s no reason to send money to developing countries to help them with carbon emissions. I’ve never thought President Obama wanted to do it for that reason. He thought America rose to power by raping developing countries and he wanted to use the co-called climate change issue to level the playing field – Social Justice on a global scale. But climate change is likely the ebb and flow of conditions over long historical periods.

Similarly, the Left, that usually has a love affair with Russia, especially Bernie Sanders, now sees Russian Collusion as a means to an end – the removal of President Donald John Trump. Ergo the mythical proportions. You MUST believe, or Trump stays in office.

Video: FOX’s interview followed by CNN coverage of the story as it broke

That leads to two basic types of people when it comes to politics.

There are those of us that don’t know if Russian Collusion is real but hope that it isn’t. And there are people who don’t know if Russian Collusion is real, and hope that it is.

The former group, of which I am a member, is far more pleased with the state of the Union than we were under Obama. Things are better. The national malaise has been turned around. Trump-ism works and optimism has become trumptimism.

The latter group knows that there MUST be Russian Collusion because Trump is ______(fill in the blank). You can choose from the following menu:

• A sexist pig
• A racist pig
• Anti-immigrant
• Anti-woman
• Xeno/Homo Phobic
• Nationalist
• Nazi ( you gotta have that choice in here)
• Bombastic

But in any case, he’s got America humming by just about every economic indicator that is measurable. That’s just the opposite of what was going on under Obama who was a narcissist, and maybe a couple of other things from the above list. If you ask me to state the main difference in the two, I’d say Trump loves America, and Obama clearly does not.

None of this proves or disproves Russian Collusion.

So when Midland’s Mike Conaway and other members of the Committee made the “no collusion” announcement, that became the first official rendering of an opinion based on interviews and other evidence. I was happy because I like America under Trump. But if you, whether Democrat or Republican, have invested all your emotions in Trump being a Russian agent, you had to compartmentalize.

I think it’s highly unlikely that Trump colluded with Russia to win this election. But certain actions of the Hillary Clinton campaign make it easy to believe that she may have colluded. The problem is that Conaway’s committee let her off the hook too, in spite of Uranium One, Bill’s $500,000 speech in Russia, Hillary’s campaign & the DNC paying for most of the Steele Dossier, and the ongoing shenanigans of the Clinton Foundation. Not to mention the Home Server Scandal.

The networks balk at the HIC results.

Exoneration of any kind is no story at the big networks. According to NewsBusters, ABC and CBS downplayed the story on their 5:30 p.m. CT newscasts. NBC simply ignored it and ran a few cute stories about a Powerball winner and Warren Buffett’s $1 million-dollar March Madness bracket challenge. You can’t make this up.

White FOX News’ graphic was something to the effect of “House Intelligence Committee says no collusion,” CNN’s was more like “GOP releases committee report without the input of Democrats.” Erin Burnett was way out front with her disdain for this story.

Of course, the ranking Democrat, Adam Schiff, is a Trump hater of the first degree. Just as he crafted an opposition memo, he will write a dissenting report, claimed that there is more investigating to be done. He’s claimed for months that he’s seen the evidence, but he never produces any, and his credibility is shot.

Video: Here’s one of many Schiff appearances on CNN during which he purports to have lots of evidence of Russian Collusion

Enter “Unsigned in Waco.”

Back when I had a message board at my old Be Logical website, I had a friend from Waco who sent me interesting mails, but didn’t want his name to get out for personal reasons. So I used them with the signature “Unsigned in Waco.” I know who he is, but will respect his wishes to remain anonymous. Suffice it to say that he is not a Trump fan. Witness this email I just received:

Lynn, have you read the Mueller indictments against the Russians?

It specifically charges that the Russians “engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then candidate Donald Trump.”

It’s not a good look to see the Republican House Intel Committee members side with Putin against our own CIA, FBI and NSA. In fact, it should be scary as hell and a development that no doubt gives the authoritarian thug-killer great satisfaction.

To also the believe the Russians didn’t help Trump, you have to believe that Assange and Wikileaks were honest actors in the hacking and release of Democrat emails and not involved with Russia or Russian hackers in any way. Or that no one connected with the Trump campaign was aware of Wikileaks activities. Read about Trump’s, Jones’ and Assange’s mutual weird buddy.

You can whatabout Clinton till the cows come home. Most of your examples occurred before she was Secretary of State. It’s a farce and a disservice to your listeners to suggest that the Steele dossier was written in collusion between the Clinton campaign and Putin’s spy agencies to thwart Trump’s candidacy. If that was the case, why was it only leaked after the election? Steele spent his life working on behalf of the Western alliance to deter Soviet and Russian aggression. He also served alongside America in Iraq and Afghanistan. He may have been played by the Russians to a certain extent but to smear him as a Russian agent would be in the best tradition of Russian propaganda.

The story of Russian Collusion is not about whether the Russians interfered. It’s not about whether the Russians helped Trump. It is not about whether Assange or anyone else hacked John Podesta’s account with his clever password “password.” It’s not about Steele – who was doing a job for a client in producing opposition research. He wasn’t being paid to find out about how Trump helps crippled children.

It’s about this: Whether Trump colluded with Russia in connection with the 2016 election and whether that collusion was against the law.

So far, I, and you, and Unsigned have not seen any such evidence.

Neither has CNN after two years of nightly panels based on leaks to the Washington Post and the New York Times – not one of which have panned out so far. I am not averse to believing in Trump’s Russian Collusion. Is he capable of it? Sure he is. But did he do it? Is it illegal, what he did? I don’t know and frankly, I have no idea what Special Counsel Mueller has discovered.

Based on Mueller’s propensity to leak, James Comey’s propensity to leak, the fact that nothing on Russian Collusion has actually been leaked, the fact that CNN’s scoops all crash and burn within a news cycle, and the new Committee report that finds no collusion – I’m a skeptic.

Meanwhile life goes on. And in Trump’s America, it’s going pretty darn well.

lynn@BeLogical.com

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: