Hillary personally approved sharing of Trump-Russia allegation with the press, but is that enough to prove her guilt?
Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager Robby Mook made news when he told a court on Friday that Hillary personally signed off on sharing debunked allegations linking Donald Trump and the Kremlin-backed Alfa-Bank with the media in the run-up to the 2016 Presidential election.
Mook was a witness at the trial of former Clinton campaign
lawyer Michael Sussman who has been indicted by Justice Department special
counsel John Durham on charges he lied to the bureau’s general counsel to hide
his connection to the Clinton campaign.
Mook
testified that he and others at the Clinton campaign “weren’t totally
confident” regarding the veracity of the information, but they sent it to
reporters anyway a few months before the election hoping that reporters would
follow it up and determine if it was 'accurate' or 'substantive.'
Mook added that he
discussed the matter with then-senior adviser Jake Sullivan - now
the White House National Security Adviser- and campaign chairman John
Podesta about whether to share the information with a reporter.
Ideally, Sullivan should have been asked to step down, until
the probe is complete. But ideas and morals have no place in the world of the
Democrats. The Bidens are neck-deep in shady business dealings and who knows
what Sullivan has on them. Also, Democrat allies and puppets in the media are
not going to challenge them.
The specifics
of Mook’s remarks were as follows:
'I discussed it with Hillary as well. I don't remember the
substance of the conversation, but notionally, the discussion was, hey, we have
this and we want to share it with a reporter. I recall it being a member of our
press staff. We authorized a staff member to share it with the media.'
This statement did cause cheering among Trump supporters and
right-leaning media outlets. They probably hope this is the first step towards
punishing Hillary for her actions.
Before we jubilate, let’s revisit the facts, so far.
Mook has NOT accepted that Hillary and her accomplices
concocted the Trump-Russia collusion hoax with nefarious intents. Mook has
NOT conceded that the media was acting
under orders from Hillary to conduct the most prolonged and vast disinformation
campaigns in modern US history.
Mook has NOT acknowledged that the Clinton campaign under
Hillary’s instructions colluded with rogue lawyers and personnel from
investigation or intelligence agents to fabricate a link between Trump and
Russia to delegitimize Trump’s victory
Mook has also NOT claimed that Hillary and the Democrats
purposefully circulated and eventually weaponized their fabrications to cause
the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller to undermine President Trump
and block his agenda.
All that Mook has said is that they happened to discover some
information. Since they were not sure of the veracity of its contents they
shared it with the news media people. Mook effectively placed the
blame on the news media.
They could easily claim that they expected the media to do their
due diligence by rigorously fact-checking the allegation and debunking it.
Also, it wasn’t their fault that it was published.
There is nothing in Mook’s utterances that links Hillary to
any criminal wrongdoings. Campaigns always 'discover' information about their
opponents that is dubious. Campaigns often leak dubious information to the
media.
This is an immoral practice but it is not necessarily any
violation of the law. Sadly in today's world legality and morality don't always
run together.
Do not for a moment think that Mook’s utterances were
spontaneous.
He is likely to have been coached to make it look appear that
this was just another occurrence during the campaign. In the future, when
Hillary is linked to any 'problematic' discoveries they can merely claim it was
‘run by her’ but she wasn’t a conspirator.
Hillary can always claim she has no recollection of the
specifics of any meetings that occurred informally, you can be sure that there
are no minutes of these meetings or emails. She may even say she used the word ‘alleged’
before making her claims.
The fact that Sussman is taking
the blame is proof of the direction this is taking. The narrative will be that
low-level actors such as Sussman got carried away in their zeal for Hillary.
They may even claim that Trump is such an immoral ogre that they felt they were
acting in defense of the interests of the US. A sympathetic jury and judge in
Washington may not even consider this unworthy of punishment.
If John Durham wants to go after Hillary he has considerable
challenges before him.
This isn’t a theft where the fence caught with stolen diamonds
names the thieves and a DNA trail establishes the identity of the thieves.
To indict Hillary, Durham will have to establish a trail of
iron-clad evidence that goes back straight to her.
A great deal of time has passed since the actual events occurred,
enough time for the power to destroy evidence. Also, expect Washington to place
considerable impediments before the investigation to cause delays that will be
so considerable that the conclusions are rendered meaningless.
Durham also has to prove intent i.e. Hillary abused her power
and her position with malicious intent to baselessly cause an investigation to delegitimize
an elected President. It may seem obvious to the layman, based on all we
know, but Durham needs evidence. If he begins with Hillary it will pass through
corrupt government officials and eventually end up at Obama’s doorstep. Washington
will put all their might to stop that.
The powerful have numerous ways to pressurize witnesses and
even investigators to bend and eventually capitulate.
The sole benefit these headlines have is that it reminds
people of the Washington Democrat establishment and how rotten it is to the
core. It will help the GOP campaign and fundraise.
Will the top tier among the conspirators ever be punished for
the Russia hoax?
That would be very difficult but not entirely impossible.
Also appears on American Thinker
Comments
Post a Comment