Republican Senator Rips Democratic Colleagues On Russian Collusion Chatter: Where's The Evidence?

[endicom]

Townhall
Matt Vespa
June 18, 2017

Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified this week before the Senate Intelligence Committee to discuss the Russian meddling during the 2016 election. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) noticed something glaring about the questions asked by his Democratic colleagues:

More... https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/06/18/republican-senator-rips-democratic-colleagues-on-russian-collusion-chatter-where-n2340914

[endicom]

Good for Cotton, there should be more of this from the Pubs. Justify the investigations or end the show trials.

[ConservativeGranny]

This isn't a trial. It is an investigation. The purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence. When all of the evidence has been gathered it will be shared. They haven't even finished conducting interviews.

[endicom]

This isn't a trial. It is an investigation. The purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence. When all of the evidence has been gathered it will be shared. They haven't even finished conducting interviews.

Show trials are not trials. They are for show.

[truth_seeker]

This isn't a trial. It is an investigation. The purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence. When all of the evidence has been gathered it will be shared. They haven't even finished conducting interviews.

An investigation of what? What is the probable cause?

It is a perpetual fishing expedition, intended SOLELY to delay, distract, impede and block the Republican's agenda.

That agenda includes massive cuts to federal spending, increases to military spending, Obamacare repeal/replace, greater border enforcement, education choice, and other reforms that real conservatives have asked for for years.

Anybody claiming to be conservative, Trump voter or not, ought to be opposed to blocking the Republican agenda.

[Cripplecreek]

This isn't a trial. It is an investigation. The purpose of an investigation is to gather evidence. When all of the evidence has been gathered it will be shared. They haven't even finished conducting interviews.

The problem is that Trump supporters believe and behave like liberals. They assume a repeated lie is all it will take to alter reality but all they get is excited for the letdown. In the end they'll be angry at the republicans for failing to make their fantasies come true.

They can stir themselves to a lather about investigating Lynch or impeaching the impeachers but we all know neither will ever amount to anything.

[ConservativeGranny]

An investigation of what? What is the probable cause?

It is a perpetual fishing expedition, intended SOLELY to delay, distract, impede and block the Republican's agenda.

That agenda includes massive cuts to federal spending, increases to military spending, Obamacare repeal/replace, greater border enforcement, education choice, and other reforms that real conservatives have asked for for years.

Anybody claiming to be conservative, Trump voter or not, ought to be opposed to blocking the Republican agenda.

It is an investigation of Russian interference of a US election. As all investigations go it may expand as evidence presents itself. That's how investigations work.

[truth_seeker]

It is an investigation of Russian interference of a US election. As all investigations go it may expand as evidence presents itself. That's how investigations work.

What is the probable cause? What is the connection to Trump?

What is the connection to trump, in view of the FACT the USSR/Russia have meddled in our (and other nations') elections since 1946?

It is a politically motivated fishing expedition. It will be successful if it impedes, distracts from, delays the Republican agenda.

[Oceander]

What is the probable cause? What is the connection to Trump?

What is the connection to trump, in view of the FACT the USSR/Russia have meddled in our (and other nations') elections since 1946?

It is a politically motivated fishing expedition. It will be successful if it impedes, distracts from, delays the Republican agenda.

Investigations don't require probable cause. 

[truth_seeker]

Investigations don't require probable cause.

Neither do fishing expeditions. And this is nothing more than a fishing expedition. 

[ConservativeGranny]

I did some research to find out more information for you. Mueller's mandate, under the law, is:

To investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump" and "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."
But the special counsel regulation also allows the special counsel to "investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the special counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses."

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-many-tentacles-of-the-trump-russia-probe/ar-BBCOtnL?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp

The above link is the source for the previous quote and also a good starting point to research the various stories contained within. It will explain how and why the special counsel was appointed and how the investigation has evolved so far.

"In his order appointing Mueller special counsel, Rosenstein wrote that his responsibility is to ensure a “full and thorough investigation of the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.” As special counsel, Mueller is charged with investigating “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump.” In addition, Mueller is to look into “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” That would include any obstruction of the investigation or perjury related to it."

The above is from here:

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/05/special-counsel-qa/

It also further explains that Mueller will report to Rosenstein (now we understand why he is another target now) and that Mueller is to work independently however with limits. The limits are explained in detail.  He cannot expand the investigation without consulting with Rosenstein.

"In addition, Rosenstein can ask the special counsel to “provide an explanation for any investigative or prosecutorial step,” and if such step is deemed “inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices” the acting attorney general reserves the right to intervene, provided Congress is notified."

So there are checks and balances built into the process and it cannot be conducted as a "witch hunt" with unlimited abilities to expand the investigation or investigate without due cause.

Like I said, this is a good start to do further research on your own into the reasons for this investigation as well as the process itself. I had to do that myself as I didn't really understand the role of the special counsel. It was useful information to help me form my opinions about the investigation and understand why there is "talk" about firing Mueller and possible rancor between Rosenstein and Trump. The history of the Rosenstein memo re: Comey is an interesting story in itself.

Hope the information is helpful.

[mystery-ak]

Great work ConservativeGranny

[Cripplecreek]

It is an investigation of Russian interference of a US election. As all investigations go it may expand as evidence presents itself. That's how investigations work.

Meanwhile

The Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation imposting new sanctions on Russia on Thursday with a 98-2 vote.

The legislation would impose new sanctions on Russian individuals tied to “malicious cyber activity” or Russia’s intelligence and defense sectors.

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,267911.0.html

[truth_seeker]

Great work ConservativeGranny

What about connections with Hillary's campaign, you know the candidate that did her "reset" with Putin, and arranged uranium transfers?

Are the anti-Trump people so obsessed with getting him on something, anything, they have little/no interests about the democrat party?

[driftdiver]

Investigations don't require probable cause.

Investigations generally require a reasonable probability that a crime was committed.  This is a political hit job.  Something that's dangerous to us all.

[endicom]

I did some research to find out more information for you. Mueller's mandate, under the law, is:

To investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump" and "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."

Then this is not an investigation into Russian interference in the election but an investigation only of the Trump team.

How come? 

[ConservativeGranny]

What about connections with Hillary's campaign, you know the candidate that did her "reset" with Putin, and arranged uranium transfers?

Are the anti-Trump people so obsessed with getting him on something, anything, they have little/no interests about the democrat party?

No one had more high hopes that Hillary would finally be fitted for her orange jumpsuit than I did. Unfortunately Trump changed his mind and decided that Hillary had suffered enough and didn't want to hurt her or her family. Of course I am interested. But what does that have to do with Mueller's investigation? When the JD decides to finally pursue an investigation of Hillary I will be their biggest supporter. Until then the excuse that Hillary was worse or did it first or other "what-abouts" has nothing to do with whether or not this investigation into Russian interference should continue. It's a pointless deflection. We should care about ALL government officials who do wrong and any interference in our free elections no matter where it is coming from or which politicial party is in power. One doesn't preclude the other either legally or morally. 

[bilo]

What about connections with Hillary's campaign, you know the candidate that did her "reset" with Putin, and arranged uranium transfers?

Are the anti-Trump people so obsessed with getting him on something, anything, they have little/no interests about the democrat party?

Unfortunately, I think the answer is yes.

I didn't vote for Trump. I couldn't support him after the way he maligned the other Pubs in the primaries. However, it's been obvious from the get go that this Russian "hacking" the election stuff is all an attempt to create a crime where none exists. The Pubs are showing themselves to be incapable of leading because they let themselves be manipulated into conducting a witch hunt which does two things for the Rats. The Rats slow or stop any legislative achievements and they discourage anyone from joining the Trump administration team, after all who wants to be subject to an investigation.

From what I've seen so far I think the Pubs have made a great case for never supporting them again. They've done nothing! They haven't even supported the POTUS who is from their party. Instead they've bowed to whatever the Rats want. We still have obamacare. We still have DAPA and no wall. We still have the same tax code and no investigations of those responsible for attacking conservative groups. Now after one of their own is shot and nearly killed the rallying cry is "let's all try to get along" instead of calling on the Rats to end all the violence.

[DB]

No one had more high hopes that Hillary would finally be fitted for her orange jumpsuit than I did. Unfortunately Trump changed his mind and decided that Hillary had suffered enough and didn't want to hurt her or her family. Of course I am interested. But what does that have to do with Mueller's investigation? When the JD decides to finally pursue an investigation of Hillary I will be their biggest supporter. Until then the excuse that Hillary was worse or did it first or other "what-abouts" has nothing to do with whether or not this investigation into Russian interference should continue. It's a pointless deflection. We should care about ALL government officials who do wrong and any interference in our free elections no matter where it is coming from or which politicial party is in power. One doesn't preclude the other either legally or morally.

Well said. At this point the only way to get this off the table is by doing the investigation and releasing what was found. It won't go away any other way. There are very legitimate concerns about special councils though - just look at what happened with Scooter Libby and the whole Valerie Plame thing... Plame didn't even have protected status under the law but that didn't matter...

[ConservativeGranny]

Well said. At this point the only way to get this off the table is by doing the investigation and releasing what was found. It won't go away any other way. There are very legitimate concerns about special councils though - just look at what happened with Scooter Libby and the whole Valerie Plame thing... Plame didn't even have protected status under the law but that didn't matter...

No question about it that there is potential for railroading. There are checks and balances but they can fail. But like you said, at this point there is no other option except to let this play out. The best way to do this would have been for Trump to remain silent but that ship has sailed.

If this was some kind of conspiracy they would have had quite a few agencies (about 16) that investigated the Russian election interference to go along with it. And as noted, even the Senate believed there was enough evidence to issue Russian sanctions with only 2 dissenting votes. Hardly bi-partisan.

With that in mind I don't see how an investigation into the Russian interference could have been avoided.

[driftdiver]

No question about it that there is potential for railroading. There are checks and balances but they can fail. But like you said, at this point there is no other option except to let this play out. The best way to do this would have been for Trump to remain silent but that ship has sailed.

If this was some kind of conspiracy they would have had quite a few agencies (about 16) that investigated the Russian election interference to go along with it. And as noted, even the Senate believed there was enough evidence to issue Russian sanctions with only 2 dissenting votes. Hardly bi-partisan.

With that in mind I don't see how an investigation into the Russian interference could have been avoided.

How it could have been avoided?  Many ways.  Ask for a smidgen of evidence before starting an investigation. 

[ConservativeGranny]

How it could have been avoided?  Many ways.  Ask for a smidgen of evidence before starting an investigation.

I think there is more than a smidgen of evidence of Russian interference in our election. You can find that information in multiple forms on the web. The link I included is one of them. And it seems the US Senate agreed with the 16 US agencies that determined the same otherwise there would have been more than 2 dissenting votes for Russian sanctions.

[Cripplecreek]

I think there is more than a smidgen of evidence of Russian interference in our election. You can find that information in multiple forms on the web. The link I included is one of them. And it seems the US Senate agreed with the 16 US agencies that determined the same otherwise there would have been more than 2 dissenting votes for Russian sanctions.

Trump didn't exactly do himself any favors by hiring people with close ties to Russia like Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, Carter Page etc.

We warned of this for months.

[driftdiver]

I think there is more than a smidgen of evidence of Russian interference in our election. You can find that information in multiple forms on the web. The link I included is one of them. And it seems the US Senate agreed with the 16 US agencies that determined the same otherwise there would have been more than 2 dissenting votes for Russian sanctions.

That same evidence exists for all elections.

So why investigate trump?

[ConservativeGranny]

Something that may have  been missed in this discussion is that the subject of this article, Sen. Cotton was NOT one of the two Senators who voted against Russian sanctions on Thurs.  Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul were the only dissenting votes. So apparently Sen. Cotton agrees that there was Russian interference in our election which is what started these investigations.

While Senator Cotton may not be convinced that there was collusion on the part of the Trump campaign this is part of Mueller's job to investigate any information that may come to light during the investigation as is explained in one of the previous links I provided.