At the beginning of this long investigation I wrote that if convincing evidence is presented that candidate Trump colluded with Russians — that is, that he knowingly participated in or otherwise facilitated illegal Russian interference in the 2016 election — then I would call for his impeachment.
I also wrote that I think the entire charge is a fabrication of the embarrassed and almost pathologically mendacious candidate Clinton, and that in fact it’s largely a projection of her campaign’s own shady dealings with Russia via the Steele dossier and related nonsense. That is still my belief.
However, if Mueller provides that convincing evidence, I will admit my mistake and call for the President’s resignation or removal.
But if he does not, then I will call for the resignation of most of the nation’s press, as these clowns will have, in typical print-first-ask-questions-never fashion, poisoned the national discourse for years with their relentless and baseless claims, and given comfort to the posse of corrupt and scheming apparatchiks who, until recently, ran much of our federal law enforcement.
So let’s wait and see.
PS No, I don’t expect the press to accept its responsibility. I don’t even expect them to significantly change their message, when and if Mueller’s report exonerates the President. Most of the press supports Democrats, the more left-leaning the better, and that isn’t about to change.
John Racette says:
“…if Mueller provides that convincing evidence…”
I didn’t know you did comedy, bro.
Mueller is so in the tank for the Left, he had to grow gills. His report is fake news.
#TRUMP2020!
hr says:
The beauty of “convincing evidence” is that it’s evidence: it doesn’t matter what the motives are, if the evidence is solid. I’m the same about global warming: I’ll believe it when I see convincing evidence.