There’s no doubt that some Democrats are trying to blow the Trump connections with Russia into a big and damaging story. That’s not unusual in US politics, as Bill Clinton found out when he was president.
There’s no doubt that media blow up many stories more than is justified, and to an extent at least that’s probably happening with the Trump/Russia stories.
But that doesn’t mean there is nothing of importance to see and to investigate. The Washington Post reported factually on Jeff Sessions’ meetings with the Russian ambassador during the election campaign and he failed to disclose this adequately under sworn testimony.
Even @realDonaldTrump conceded to a lack of accuracy in Sessions’ testimony.
Jeff Sessions is an honest man. He did not say anything wrong. He could have stated his response more accurately, but it was clearly not intentional. This whole narrative is a way of saving face for Democrats losing an election that everyone thought they were supposed to win.
The Democrats are overplaying their hand. They lost the election, and now they have lost their grip on reality. The real story is all of the illegal leaks of classified and other information. It is a total “witch hunt!”
I presume Trump is referring to a Democrat “witch hunt!” and not the leaks from within his own administration. He is not the only one referring to a witch hunt. Fox News:
Trump’s response in a series of tweets is in an unusual style for Trump. And it is a classic attempt at diversion.
Attention on Trump’s and his campaign’s links with Russia are unlikely to subside.
Paul Waldman at The Week summarises in How much longer can Republicans defend Trump over Russia?
We should say that it’s possible that Sessions’ conversations with the ambassador were perfectly innocent, even if one has to wonder why he would deny that they had occurred if that were the case.
And it’s possible that there was nothing wrong with Michael Flynn’s contacts with the ambassador, or the money he got from Russian state television.
And there may be a reasonable explanation for why Trump campaign officials suddenly softened the Republican platform’s language about Russia during the GOP convention.
And there may be nothing wrong with former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort’s work for a pro-Russian strongman in Ukraine
…or with Trump associate Roger Stone’s contacts with WikiLeaks about hacked DNC emails
…or with the Russian ties of Trump Cabinet members like Rex Tillerson and Wilbur Ross.
And maybe Trump’s people had absolutely nothing to do with all the Russian hacking that was meant to help him get elected.
And perhaps no Republicans were involved in the Russian hacking of Democratic congressional candidates, even though Republicans, including a PAC with ties to none other than Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, then used the information from the hacks to attack their opponents (bet you forgot about that one).
Might it even be possible that there’s nothing more to be learned about Trump and Russia, that there are no secrets lying within this web of denial and obfuscation, that it’s all above board and ethical? Sure — anything’s possible. But given everything that we do know, that seems rather unlikely.
From now anything’s possible, but one of the least likely possibilities is that stories about Trump links with Russia are going to fade away any time soon.
Trump himself seems to be ensuring Russia stays in the news. Seven minutes ago:
‘Dems did it too’ diversions are out there, but with a significant difference – the Democrats didn’t praise Russia nor benefit from alleged Russian hacking during the election.