Executive Intelligence Review


Andrew McCarthy Describes Each Mueller Indictment as Further from Collusion

Jan. 28, 2019 (EIRNS)—Writing in the National Review today (“Stone Indictment Underscores That There Was No Trump-Russia Conspiracy”), Andrew McCarthy gives, as usual, a forceful legal expose of legal assassin Robert Mueller’s latest move against President Donald Trump and his associates.

Each new “Trump” indictment by Mueller strays further from any attempt to show collusion of the candidate or his campaign, with any Russian entity, McCarthy writes. Each shows more clearly than the indictment before, that there is no collusion case. The indictment Stone makes plain, in particular, that neither Trump nor the Trump campaign knew what “Russia had” on Hillary Clinton’s campaign, nor what “WikiLeaks had”; and they failed in their (including Stone’s) completely legal attempts to find it out. These attempts started only well after the theft of the DNC e-mails itself, and in fact, some around the Trump campaign were trying only to learn what was in WikiLeaks’ possession regarding opponent Clinton, not what might have been in Russian possession. But even of this, they learned essentially nothing until Julian Assange made the e-mails public.

McCarthy hammers at the fact that the Department of Justice has never withdrawn or corrected Comey’s House testimony two full years ago, in February 2017. There, Comey revealed a classified FBI foreign counterintelligence investigation. This, McCarthy notes, was illegal. Comey named American subjects of the investigation while it was ongoing (Trump and the Trump campaign). This, too, was illegal. And Comey falsely implied that FBI had evidence crimes may have been committed.

All the crimes since indicted, have either had nothing to do with Trump or his campaign (e.g., Manafort’s, Cohen’s prior crimes), or were “process” crimes. But DOJ has let the press continually repeat and amplify Comey’s illegal “revelations.” “Is it too much to ask,” McCarthy concludes, that the Justice Department withdraw its public suggestion that the President of the United States might be a clandestine agent of Russia?”

Interestingly a Washington Post front-page article today asks “Why is Mueller finding so many Trump associates lying,” but showing nothing at all about collusion?” The Post then quickly covers this admission by quoting “experts” giving variations of “where there’s smoke there’s fire” and surely Mueller has collusion evidence, he just hasn’t revealed it. But the smell of “nothingburger” crept even into the Post editorial room.