Here is the latest on the direct connection between Hillary Clinton’s campaign and Ukrainian nationals – the collusion between a presidential campaign and and a candidate that there IS evidence for.
From Jonathan Easley’s article at thehill.com:
A watchdog group will file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission on Wednesday alleging that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) violated federal law by soliciting opposition research on the Trump campaign from a foreign government.
The conservative group Foundation for Accountability & Civic Trust (FACT), launched in 2014 by former U.S. attorney Matthew Whitaker, will allege that political operative Alexandra Chalupa, in her capacity as a DNC consultant, improperly sought intelligence on President Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, from Ukrainian officials.
“Federal law and Commission regulations prohibit any person from knowingly soliciting, accepting or receiving contributions or donations of money or other things of value from a foreign national,” the complaint reads.
FACT alleges that Chalupa violated the ban by “knowingly soliciting” a “valuable in-kind contribution in the form of opposition research and information on a Trump campaign official from a foreign national on behalf of the Democratic National Committee.”
The complaint is based on an investigation by Politico, which found that Chalupa “met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia.”
For almost a year now, mainstream media have, desperately tried to find evidence that Donald Trump and his people colluded with Russia during last year’s presidential election. The fact that they have not found any has not deterred these media from writing and broadcasting innuendoes about the possibility almost every day.
But the collusion between Clinton’s campaign and the Ukraine? The one that there actually is evidence for? Barely a peep.
Yes, it is reported at thehill.com today – with an assurance that it is the work of a “conservative” group and a full political response from a member of the DNC, in case anyone might take it seriously.
But where is this story on the major networks or the NY Times, Washington Post, etc? Nowhere, that’s where. If it is reported at all, it is consigned to “and in other news” coverage.
Between media burying the Clinton/Ukrainian collusion, and the huge awan scandal that, aside from a possible major security breach, threatens to take down former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, I have little hope that, in the era of Trump, they will start acting like journalists and provide neutral coverage of the news.
That is why – much though I dislike the medium – I understand why Donald Trump uses twitter to get his messages out. What’s his alternative?
Fire Independent Counsel Robert Mueller? No need for that.
Merely direct Attorney General Sessions to order Mueller to thoroughly investigate Hillary’s Uranium deal, the $150 million contribution the Clinton Foundation, Slick Willie’s $500 K speaking fee to the Russians.
The authority for Trump to order this is in the US Constitution.
Article 2, Section 2:
“The President … may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices”.
That leaves zero wiggle room to duck questions.
Isn’t this straight out of the DNC Playbook?
Accuse your opponent of doing what you have done.
That way if whatever illegal thing you did comes to light, it softens the charge against you. Add in the media and you have a winning combination.