Chris Matthews is still incoherently denying that “there is no there, there” when it comes to the Trump-Russia conspiracy.
Matthews had lawyer Jill Wine-Banks on his MSNBC show to muse about the new Russia fiddle-faddle.
“I don’t think he’s attempting to hide it,” Winebank said, referring to President Trump. “I think he’s verbalizing it all the time. And yet it is the wrong thing to do where it’s interfering with an investigation. You said earlier Lawrence, that sometimes the simplest explanation is correct. During Watergate my trial partner would always say if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, sometimes it is a duck. And I think we have to look at it that way, that the simplest explanation may be that something was going on between the president and Russia that he can tolerate. Or it’s just his personality, that he’s so paranoid he can’t stand to admit possibly there was some help from the Russians in being elected.”
“Well, it’s not paranoia anymore because people are really coming for him,” Matthews said. “Anyway, thank you Jill Wine-Banks.”
That’s the problem. People are “coming” for Trump, when they should be proceeding from the evidence, none of which suggests that Donald Trump and the Russians cut a deal to get him elected.
The simplest explanation is truly the best: The Russians sought to sabotage the election and destabilize the American democratic process by placing its bet on the likely winner; at the very least, this would vent dirty laundry about Clinton dealings and damage her coming into office.
When this turned out not to be the case, the Russians went back to trashing the U.S. president; in this case, Donald Trump. Mystery solved.
The added irony is that the Mueller probe is in shambles following the release of damaging texts showing former investigator Peter Strzok told his apparent lover Lisa Page “F Trump,” he’s a “loathsome human being,” and an “idiot.” Oh yeah, here’s the kicker: He spearheaded the Clinton email investigation that “exonerated” her; the same one that changed the language of former FBI director’s memo from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless.”
Although the most damage the Russia collusion investigation has done to the Trump team is to snag various associates in lies, such as former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn who admitted, again, that he wasn’t honest about his phone call to Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak during the transition period, there have been no real headliner violations.
That’s not to say the media haven’t tried to concoct some “bombshells.” Donald Trump Jr. met with a Russian lawyer to see if she had oppo-research on Hillary Clinton. If this is a crime, all politicians would be in jail. Then there was the revelation-that-never-was that Flynn was directed during the campaign to reach out to the Russkies; of course, this little fantasy got ABC News’ Brian Ross suspended for four weeks and kicked of Trump coverage.
So, here we are. Nearly a year later and the media are still spinning their wheels over imagined Russian collusion. It’s not “alleged.” It’s not “purported.” It’s “imagined.”
No smoking gun. No hands in the cookie jar. No real evidence that current President Donald J. Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin were in cahoots to deprive the “inevitable” U.S. president Hillary Clinton from her rightful place on the throne.
It’s tough to be an MSNBC host nowadays.
- Denver sheriff defies ICE detainment request for illegal immigrant arrested in fatal hit-and-run - March 10, 2018
- Another porn star named in Stormy Daniels NDA and she accuses Trump of inappropriate ‘sexual touching’ - March 10, 2018
- Pardoned Navy sailor speaks out: Obama used me as scapegoat to take heat off Hillary Clinton - March 10, 2018