Theoretical Russiagate

A lot of overview pieces today, starting with  Crossfire Hurricane: The Theory Of The Case from Mark Wauck at the AmericanThinker

I've always maintained that the famous Trump Tower meeting on June 9, 2016, was an early attempt to ensnare the Trump campaign in a quid pro quo deal with Russians in which the Russians would supposedly provide "dirt" in exchange for sanction relief -- i.e., a clear exchange of a thing "of value" for action on official policy. Recall, this meeting took place before Carter Page's ill-timed trip to Moscow. It involved the Russian lawyer Natasha Veselnitskaya (who was allowed into the US only on the direct intervention, ultimately, of AG Loretta Lynch) and top Trump aides Jared Kushner, Don Jr., and Paul Manafort. Manafort was supposed to be directing the outreach to the Russian leadership. Veselnitskaya had claimed she could provide "dirt" on Hillary, but then inexplicably -- or maybe not -- began yammering about something called the Magnitsky Act.

Well, it so happens that the Magnitsky Act is actually all about sanctions on Russia. My take is that she was hoping to elicit some inquiry from the Trump aides that would show their willingness to discuss a quid pro quo -- bribery, a criminal violation. This would allow for a Full Investigation of the Trump campaign and even of Trump personally. Fortunately for Trump, Don Jr. cut the whole thing short.

End of story? Actually, no. One thing we keep hearing about with regard to people who are interrogated by Team Mueller is that they are repeatedly asked whether Trump himself knew about the meeting with Veselnitskaya. Did he know, do they think he knew. There are two ways to use this, neither of which add up to a criminal violation but either of which, if included in Mueller's final report (if it ever gets written) could cause serious damage to the Trump presidency

The first would be that, if Trump can be claimed to have known about the meeting, then the Steele dossier narrative about Carter Page suddenly looks like a mission to sound out the Russians on what Veselnitskaya was talking about -- sanctions, and is there a deal we, the Trump team, could make on that?

The second, leaving Page and the dossier out of it, would be if Mueller can get someone, anyone, (say, Manafort in solitary) to say they even think that Trump was told about the meeting. In combination with Trump's earlier public outright denial (as opposed to the lawyerly written response "to the best of my recollection"), that assertion would be used to create the impression that Trump denied it because of guilty knowledge. That term would mean that he denied it because he really did seriously consider the bribery scheme, even though he may have rejected it. Of course that's why he can't just simply say, Yeah, Don Jr. told me, but so what? He'd soon find out so what, because toying with a bribery scheme is a lot different than toying with a Moscow real estate deal.

I'm sorry, but the person running for the preseidency of US is entitled to some level of out reach to foreign leaders in preparation for his role in foreign policy. Adam Mill at Da Federalist: The Latest Russia Collusion ‘Bombshells’ Are Big, Fat Duds

Here’s another interesting parallel between the Corsi and Manafort stories: Both Corsi and Manafort now claim the special counsel is refusing to accept their truthful accounts of the facts and have heavily suggested they will be prosecuted if they don’t change their stories. These reports remind us of complaints about Mueller No. 2 Andrew Weissmann who, in the Enron prosecutions, was accused of intimidating witnesses to provide incriminating testimony against prosecution targets.

Roger L Simon, PJ Media: The Russia Probe Has Nothing to Do with Russia and everything to do with getting Trump.

The latest is that we learn Donald, a businessman, was trying to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. As news, that's right up there with the sky is blue and the sun rises in the East.

But it does give us a clue to what might have been in Trump's head during the transition, besides the obvious desire for a profit, when all this mess started. (Excuse me, actually it started well before the transition, as we all know.) Trump, who is a transactional businessman, was probably going to make a serious outreach to Russia via business and trade. They are, relatively speaking, a weak nation (outside of the military) and in need of economic support.

Would this approach have worked? Would an appeal to Putin's greed have overcome the serious psychological wound he obviously has over the disintegration of the Soviet Union? It's hard to say. Nothing like that was ever attempted. But we will never know now -- because of the Russia probe.

The internal hostility and power conflicts motivating that investigation have made any outreach to Russia moot for the foreseeable future. In part because of Mueller and Company, the world has become a more dangerous place. They are among the reactionaries of our time.

The dog that didn't bark? At WaEx, Byron York: Remember Prague? In Michael Cohen plea deal, Mueller says nothing about key collusion allegation

When news broke that Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about his 2016 meetings concerning the failed Trump Tower Moscow project, the chattering class instantly began talking about the failed Trump Tower Moscow project.

Of course that was news. But it turns out the Cohen plea agreement also made news in what it did not cover. Specifically, it spoke volumes — without saying a word — about a key allegation of the Trump dossier, the charge that Cohen traveled to Prague to arrange secret payments to Russian hackers attacking the Clinton campaign. The accusation is the heart of the collusion allegation, and Trump-Russia special counsel Robert Mueller's deal with Cohen strongly suggests that prosecutors have not found evidence to support it.

Althouse dissects Andy McCarthy dissecting Mueller's investigation: "As a prosecutor, you build a case by having your cooperating accomplice witnesses plead guilty to the big scheme you are trying to pin on the main culprit."

"After all, what makes these witnesses accomplices, literally, is that they were participants in the main culprit’s crime. That’s the scheme you’re trying to prove. So, on guilty-plea day, the cooperator comes into court and admits guilt to the same conspiracy on which you are trying to nail the lead defendant. That gets you 90 percent of the way home.... This kind of guilty plea signals to the world, including to all the other suspects, that the accomplice is ready to testify that the criminal scheme existed — it is not a figment of the prosecutor’s fevered imagination.... With respect to the president and 'collusion,' Mueller does not have a crime he is investigating. He is investigating in hopes of finding a crime, which is a day-and-night different thing. The lack of a crime means the 'accomplices' are not really accomplices.... [I]f you turn a prosecutor loose to investigate political campaign activities — you are apt to find unsavory conduct that is not criminal but that some people will lie about.... But the convictions [Mueller] has amassed, even if they are only for false statements or are otherwise unrelated to the Trump-Russia rationale for the investigation, prove that many people Trump brought into his campaign were corruptible and of low character...."

NYT (cited elsewhere) Seeking Truth, Mueller Exposes Culture of Lies Around Trump. No, what Mueller has exposed is that fact that if you investigate anyone close enough,  have all their paperwork at hand, you can catch them on small inconsistencies or even incorrect memories, with which you can charge them with perjury. Politico: Mueller’s Targets Are Blowing Up Their Deals. He’ll Make Them Pay. Mueller's problem is that he's showing that all his potential witnesses are liars (or more like misrememberers) so how can anyone take their testimony seriously?

Michael Goodwin at NYPo: Trump is prepping for all-out political war. Better late than never. They mean to get you. Get them first.

But he is fixated on the war, and understandably so because he is fighting for the survival of his presidency.

His theory on the origins of the war is familiar — and credible: The allegations of Russian collusion were a tissue of lies supported only by the discredited dossier secretly financed by Hillary Clinton. Those lies were given a sheen of credibility by a corrupted FBI investigation that lives on through Mueller.

“I’m sure [fired FBI Director James] Comey had someone above because you know there’s no question that [then CIA-boss] John Brennan was involved,” Trump said. “There’s no question that all of these people you see on television, all of these lightweights were involved, and it’s hard to believe that the president wasn’t involved.

“And the only reason they were doing it was just in case I won.”

As for the dossier, Trump asks: “So why isn’t Mueller looking at that? Russians were paid for the phony dossier. Now it’s been discredited, it’s total baloney, but a lot of money was passed.”

 At Da Caller, Comey caves in: Comey Strikes Deal Regarding Congressional Testimony

Former FBI Director James Comey ended a legal battle with House Republicans on Sunday, announcing that he will testify behind closed doors on Capitol Hill this week after receiving assurances that a transcript of his interview will be released to the public.
. . .
Comey sought a public hearing, claiming in a court filing Thursday that he feared “selective leaks” from Republicans. But in an emergency court hearing Friday, Comey’s attorneys acknowledged that the request to quash the congressional subpoena was unorthodox, suggesting the motion had little chance of succeeding.

Comey wrote Sunday on Twitter that he was “grateful for a fair hearing from judge.” He said that he will testify “in the dark” but that Republicans had agreed he is “free to talk when done and transcript released in 24 hours.” “This is the closest I can get to public testimony,” he wrote.

Which is pretty much what Republicans said from the start. Now watch him him go to Congress and lie his ass off again, and watch Mueller ignore it again.  WaEx: Trump legal team makes case to prosecute Comey, others for lying after Cohen guilty plea

Former and current members of President Trump’s legal team have compiled research to make the case that former FBI Director James B. Comey misled Congress in his testimony and is not a reliable witness for special counsel Robert Mueller.

The lawyers last year tried to persuade Mr. Mueller to investigate Mr. Comey, his former colleague, to no avail.

The Trump-Comey war took on new dimensions last week as Mr. Mueller won a guilty plea from former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who admitted to lying to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence about a proposed election-year Trump Organization Moscow hotel deal.

“The Cohen plea of lying to Congress by the special counsel raises the very serious question as to why the special counsel has refused to investigate and prosecute the false statements and testimony of James Comey, the main accuser of the president, before the Senate Judiciary and intel committees,” former Trump attorney John Dowd told The Washington Times.