Pat Buchanan: Mueller’s First Indictments a ‘Letdown’ for Anti-Trumpers
Conservative political commentator Pat Buchanan said Monday on “The Laura Ingraham Show” that the charges leveled against Paul Manafort and Rick Gates in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe are “going to be something of a letdown” to Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans.
Buchanan, former communications director to President Ronald Reagan and two-time presidential candidate, noted that the charges President Donald Trump’s two former campaign officials fielded don’t provide the “smoking gun” evidence tying Trump’s campaign to Russia’s 2016 U.S. election interference for which many anti-Trump Americans had hoped.
"I thought the investigation was supposed to be about collusion between Trump and [Russian President] Putin. And what they have done is they have taken a campaign manager who was with Trump for three months and apparently gone back all the way to 2012 or 2010, 2011 and indicted him for income tax evasion and things like that," Buchanan said.
"So what it tells me is that after a year of investigation, or more than that by the FBI, and many, many months by Mr. Mueller, they haven't got it. They have not found the smoking gun ... on the collusion between Trump and Vladimir Putin," he added. "And so I think that, you know, I think this is going to be something of a letdown to these folks.”
While the country responds to Mueller's first charges in the Russia probe, Buchanan also urged the U.S. to pay attention to the revelations that have been pouring in over the past couple of weeks tying the Democratic National Committee and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign to the discredited dossier on Trump and Russia.
Buchanan told LifeZette Editor-in-Chief Laura Ingraham that the news revealing the Clinton campaign and the DNC helped fund the research that went into compiling the salacious allegations in the dossier should warrant significant attention from anyone who claims to be interested in and focused on Russia's election interference.
While the country responds to Mueller's first charges in the Russia probe, Buchanan also urged the U.S. to pay attention to the revelations that have been pouring in over the past couple of weeks tying the Democratic National Committee and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign to the discredited dossier on Trump and Russia.
Buchanan told LifeZette Editor-in-Chief Laura Ingraham that the news revealing the Clinton campaign and the DNC helped fund the research that went into compiling the salacious allegations in the dossier should warrant significant attention from anyone who claims to be interested in and focused on Russia's election interference.
"This thing stinks to high heaven," Buchanan added. "And you haven't got all the dots connected yet. But what was the basis for those [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] warrants that were issued, you know, to look into Donald Trump's people? And what was the basis of unmasking all the phone calls with all Trump's people with the Russians?"
Noting that not all of the dots have been connected yet on the various facets of Russia-related investigations, Buchanan said that the part the Obama administration played and the part the dossier's author, Christopher Steele, played require further scrutiny.
"I mean, the real connection here — it seems to me we're getting to, we haven't connected all the dots — is between Steele, the Russians, the KGB and FSB agents, and then the FBI and what went to the White House," he said.
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/pat-buchanan-muellers-first-indictments-are-a-let-down-for-anti-trumpers/
Tags
Who is online
120 visitors
"The special counsel's initial charges against Manafort and Gates aren't the 'smoking gun' of collusion many Dems had anticipated"
Time is our friend, it took two years to get the "smoking gun" on Nixon.
Yep, you might get her for Jaywalking.
One thing about special counsel investigations - they have an unlimited budget, few guidelines and all the time in the world. That always ends with a conviction for something by someone, except in the case of Bill Clinton. He got every democratic Senator to acquit him on both charges (perjury & obstruction). All 45 democratic Senators voted in his behalf. Ah, those Clintons!
Even Starr has said there wasn't anything there except Monika Lewinski and, last I checked getting a BJ from a consenting adult isn't illegal.
1. At least he didnt bring up Uranium One. Buchanan is not that dumb.
2. Who suggested to Hillary Clinton that she should collude with the Russians? If you can produce evidence that it was suggested that she should collude with the Russian government, you might have something.
3. We already know that the Trump campaign did number 2.
The Trump campaign was naively willing, but never got to collude. On the other hand the Clinton campaign did indeed pay for the Steele Dossier - which was dirt on Trump from Russian officials. Fortunately for the Clinton people, they haven't been investigated, thus far, but we are getting there.
So, I guess you got it backwards
Oh please, Trump has been funneling money into campaigns for decades and, he has lied his way to being a billionaire.
Consider, Trump gave money to Hillary Clinton during her 2008 campaign, he's donated money to other Democrats over the past few decades as well, he's a Republican now because he found out that the racists moved to that party.
That part I'll agree to.
Is she not a human being capable of agency?
OK, where is any evidence or suggestion that Hillary Clinton desired to collude with the Russian government?
We know that the Trump campaign did.
Her agents paid for information from high ranking Russian officials. By your definition, it's an open and shut case that she colluded.
She did what Trump is supposed to have tried to do.
Uh, your first word, you forgot the is. You know, "depends on what the 'is-is"
Related:
the proof, at best, implies that the Russians acquired thousands of Clinton emails and then had to inform a tangential Trump campaign figure of this fact so he could pass it along to the campaign, that would mean Trump and his campaign had nothing to do with the acquisition of the emails.
A s observed above, this brings us back to the meaning of “collusion.” I’ve long argued that this term has been used by Trump’s accusers because they don’t have proof of criminal collusion. The term “collusion” can have a dark connotation, but it really only means some kind of concerted activity — not necessarily illegal. Prosecutors don’t care about collusion; they care about conspiracy — an agreement by two or more people to commit a violation of a criminal statute. That is, even if there is some concerted activity, collusion is not a crime unless the Trump campaign conspired with the Putin regime to do something federal law makes a crime — for example, to hack communications systems. If Trump officials and associates did not do this, then their activities may be unsavory, but they are not criminal.
To put it another way: Notice that Mueller did not make Papadopoulos plead guilty to collusion with Russia. For a prosecutor, there is nothing better than getting a cooperating accomplice to admit guilt to the scheme the prosecutor is investigating. It goes a long way toward proving that the scheme existed. Once you’ve got that, it’s much easier to prove that the cooperator’s confederates are guilty, too. But even though there’s a great deal of evidence that Papadopoulos colluded with Russia, there’s no charge along those lines. There’s just a single false-statement charge on which, according to the plea agreement, he’s probably looking at no jail time, and certainly no more than six months. Why no collusion charge? Because collusion is not a crime.
Read more at:
You are hair breadth from admitting that the Trump campaign tried to get damaging information on an American presidential candidate directly from the Russian government.
And we dont even know what ELSE is coming.
Is that criminal? Is what Hillary did a crime?
It may be alot of things, as McCarthy said "f Trump officials and associates did not do this, then their activities may be unsavory, but they are not criminal. It is a disgraceful thing for an American political candidate to seek damaging information about his or her opponent from a despicable, anti-American regime. But it is not illegal. A criminal investigation is about proving crimes, not revealing dirty politics."
What is the actual crime Russia and Trump colluded to commit?
And we dont even know what ELSE is coming.
More indictments that involve bad disclosures, tax reporting issues and false statements to investigators probably. I'd be surprised if there's an actual underlying crime anywhere.
Doesn't matter. Too many Russian connections in everything close to Trump.
Money laundering is not 'opposition' research. Nice try though.
You are correct. He is not. But I bet 'he' is sweating it out. He may not be know where everything comes from through no fault of his own except his laziness to know and understand these things. If he has any dealings through The Cyprus Banks, if I were him I'd be checking them out. And with Wilbur Ross as his Secretary of Commerce, I'd be viewing Cyprus Bank connections as if they were leprosy.
The Cyprus Banks are "the Russian Connection."
I hope and dream of nothing. You?
Another unhappy day in American history.
Mr. Presidents not happy, Manafort and Gates certainly aren't happy, trumpets aren't happy and anti trumpets aren't happy either. So a lot of unhappy Americans today.
But look at it this way we all have something in common again. No one is happy.
I just wonder once again how is this making America great ?
I'll add, if these people really are the type of "Best of the Best" trump has to offer, I think we're in real trouble. WTF happened to "Drain the swamp" ?
Well it looks like it's happening in spite of President trump not because of him. These charges aren't jaywalking folks and trump calls his people the best of the best... maybe he cant judge people so well after all eh ?
Someone should teach him about proper vetting perhaps... SOON !
Although I doubt it matters too much to trump with his WIN at almost any cost attitude. You always get a second chance in business with the running of America ... not so much.
Good luck to us all.
I'm happy. Two straight quarters with 3% or greater GDP, 4.2% unemployment, the debt has gone down nearly a trillion dollars, coal production up 38% year to year, Gorsuch in the Supreme Court, illegals being rounded up and deported, tax cuts coming by Thanksgiving, and neither Hillary nor Obama are president