Skip to main content

No Collusion!

The President and his cronies, on HUNDREDS of occasions, have said that there was NO COLLUSION!  Why do they continue to drive that narrative, and why do they continue to use that specific word to drive it?

The truth is they know that specific word isn't in the law as being an illegal act (other than in Anti-Trust cases), but if you look at the definition of that specific word, and dig just under the surface of the ridiculousness we are hearing out of Washington on a daily basis, it can become very eye opening. 

COLLUSION - Secret agreement or conspiracy especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose.

Trump and his cronies have been throwing the "No Collusion!" catch phrase around now for a long time, but it has ramped up in recent months as the ongoing investigations surrounding Trump's former Campaign Manager and Lawyer have both presented the possibility of incriminating evidence against Trump. 

After the recent Cohen Tapes came to the forefront and after Cohen stated through his lawyers that he is willing to acknowledge that Trump knew about the infamous Trump Tower Meeting with the Russians and signed off on it before it happened, Trump has sent Giuliani on a rampage in the media to send a new message, and Trump has also went to Twitter to do what he considers to be diversionary damage control with his base. 

The new message isn't, "There was no collusion!"  The new message is, "There was no collusion, but if there was it wouldn't be illegal."

The simple fact is that Collusion can be illegal.  You see, Conspiracy is a crime, and depending upon the situation, some acts of Collusion amount to conspiracy under the law.  Notice you don't hear Trump or his lawyers spouting off on a regular basis, "There was no Conspiracy!"  They don't because they know Conspiracy is illegal.

Conspiracy is illegal when more than one person or entity works together to commit a crime or to defraud the United States Government.  Conspiracy to defraud the United States Government involves the use of deceit to prevent a government agency from doing its job. 

There have already been indictments for conspiracy, many of which at this point are aimed at the Russian Hackers who tried to prevent the Federal Election Commission from doing its job properly.

The President is running a constant damage control campaign before anything that could possibly come out against him gets out.  That way he controls the court of public opinion to the best of his ability.  This is why Trump continuously denigrates the press and anyone who speaks the truth about things he has said and done.  The more he denigrates, the more people start to believe that he is the victim and not the perpetrator. 

Don't let the President fool any of you.  He is lying through his teeth every time he opens his mouth.  as of day 528 of his presidency, he had already been logged as providing 4,229 lies and mistruths to the American Public since taking office.  That is an astounding number, averaging around 8 lies per day throughout his first year-and-a-half. 

The entire reason for this blog today is to inform you all that you need to look below the surface when it comes to Trump, because everything he says and does right now is calculated and has an alternative motive than what it seems.  He is backed into a corner and trying on a daily basis to set up a case, denigrate people and institutions like the justice department, and provide alternative facts that will paint him a victim who is simply being bullied and picked on. 

That wasn't, isn't, and will never be the case.  Trump is a deceiver, he lies, and he misinterprets the truth to make himself look better than he is. 

It is to the point that it makes me want to throw up in my own mouth every time he opens his and speaks.

DUNK

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Trump and the DOJ Trying to Silence Mueller...

Mueller is set to sit in front of Congress on Wednesday this week and answer questions regarding the Mueller Investigation.  The DOJ, and organization that is supposed to look out for the best interests of America but has recently decided to become Trump's personal Law Firm, has sent correspondence to Mueller about what he can and cannot answer. For instance, you have the question of the 10 documented cases of obstruction in volume 2 of the report.  Mueller made it clear that he was bound by DOJ policy and could not indict a sitting president.  One very important question the Congressional Leadership will likely ask is, "If Donald Trump wasn't the sitting President, would you have indicted him based on the amount of evidence in the report?"  That question in every respect is fair.  You are asking the head of an investigation if they would have indicted someone had an arbitrary roadblock not been in place.  I say arbitrary roadblock because the policy is...

Truth Matters

If there is one thing I need to keep reminding myself in today's world of political discourse, it is that Truth Matters. At any point in time I can turn on (insert news agency here) News and what I see is vastly different depending upon the news agency I watch.  Why is that?  Every mainstream news organization is bias in some way based upon who runs or owns the news organization.  Don't get me wrong; there are great and impartial journalists and agencies out there, but we are talking in aggregate and not about individuals or one-off agencies. When an issue like immigration is at the forefront of political discourse you can tune into CNN, MSNBC, and FOX and likely get three completely different takes on immigration.  Each news organization tailors their message to speak to what they feel is their viewer base and potential viewer base. That in and of itself is understood by people who follow politics on a regular basis and dig through multiple news sources in ord...

Why does it have to be one way or the other?

I remember a time when I could sit and talk politics and religion with people and have good, productive debates.  The debates were not hateful or one sided, and only rational personal opinions and actual facts were used during the discussions.  They included each person stating their points and making their case, and then each side came to compromises that allowed for solutions that would be good for both parties in the debate.  How did we come to a time in our country's history where we are so vehemently divided on every issue that nothing beneficial to the majority of the American populous or the stability of the country itself can be accomplished?  I am going to state some facts in the next paragraphs.  They may be facts you don't agree with, but they are facts none-the-less.  Those of you on the Right who believe your party's platform has all of the answers to the issues and problems this country faces...you are wrong.  Those of ...