I’m writing about
Rep. Stefanik joining 8 members of House Intelligence to call on Rep. Schiff to
resign because “the findings of the special counsel conclusively refute your
past and present exertions.” Odd, since they’ve only seen the Barr letter and
not the Mueller report. Rep. Schiff gives rebuttal in which he mentions the
Russians approaching the Trump campaign with “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. Instead
of contacting the FBI, they met with them in Trump Tower and later “lied
about that meeting and said it was about adoptions.” He also brings up Paul
Manafort sending polling data to the Kremlin, Jared Kushner’s attempt to
“establish a secret back channel of communication with the Russians,” Michael
Flynn’s conferring with the Russian ambassador about sanctions before the
inauguration, Donald Trump’s calling on Russia to hack Clinton’s e-mails and
his secret attempt “to consummate a real estate deal in Moscow” all through the
campaign. A reasonable person might see moral collusion, if not legal.
Rep. Stefanik has
said, “Policymakers on both sides of the aisle should respect the findings of
this investigation: There was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the
Russian government.” Does she have as much of a problem with the president
disrespecting the findings by falsely saying he’s exonerated as she does with
Rep. Schiff? Obstruction, anyone?
Some of Mueller’s
investigators say Barr, “Failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry
and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Barr indicated.”
They were silent as the tomb during the investigation, but they’re free to
speak now. When they come before House Intelligence, are those who are so
troubled by Rep. Schiff, but not the president, going to attempt to get at the
truth?
286 words
No comments:
Post a Comment