Footnotes

Today is yet another installment of the Democrat-scripted circus intended to smear Donald Trump with now disproven claims of Russian collusion and obstruction of justice. It's worth noting that none of this travesty would have happened if we had an ethical news media that cared more about the truth and less about their own political biases. But that's naive.

As Robert Mueller testifies today, we'll get the usual histrionics by "outraged" Dems, the usual protective rebuttal by angered Repubs, and the usual fake news "reporting" and commentary by the Dems' trained hamsters in the media. There will be no attempt at context, no effort to probe beneath the surface, no work to help the public understand that much of the "evidence" presented by Mueller's team was based on hearsay and testimony (spoken and written) from people who are clearly biased against the president. And even with all of that, the Mueller team could find no criminal wrongdoing. Yeah, I know, the Dems insist that it's there, sorta like a 3-year old insists that unicorns, really, really exist.

The Dems have a clear advantage in all of this, because throughout the "Russian Collusion" investigation they trafficked in innuendo and dishonesty on a regular basis (think: the blatant lies of Rep. Adam Schiff). The truth lies in the weeds, and the general public has little interest in the details that provide a strong indication that: (1) the entire investigation was ginned up by a cabal of deep state operatives (e.g., Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Strok) within the FBI and intelligence community with the specific intent of bringing down Trump's presidency, and (2) that the Mueller team was deeply biased against Trump from the onset of the investigation. Even given those assertions, the Mueller team still could NOT come up with any evidence of collusion nor could they accuse Trump or anyone else of obstruction.

If you're willing to spend the time, there are true journalists who have dissected Mueller's report. Eric Felton takes a look at the 2,000 footnotes in the report and writes:

Who knew that the humble footnote would loom so large in some of the most consequential documents of our time? Those bottom-of-the-page annotations are supposed to impose rigor on authors by forcing them to cite justifications for what they assert. But in the age of collusion claims, footnotes have become so much more -- places for officials to tuck away inconvenient information; discreet spaces in which to make dubious assertions; or fine print in which required disclosures can be hidden in plain sight.

It was in the footnotes, for example, where the FBI appears to have misled the FISA court in its application to spy on Carter Page – obscuring its reliance on opposition research, the Steele dossier, financed by the Hillary Clinton campaign ...

Most of the citations are matter-of-fact support for claims made in the main text. But a close reading reveals that many of the footnotes raise more questions than they answer, especially regarding Mueller’s methods and intent. Some footnotes show that key allegations often rely on the flimsy say-so of media accounts; others show a willingness to accept the claims of anti-Trump critics at face value. Mueller and his team also used the footnotes as the place to include unsubstantiated gossip and speculation .... If Robert Mueller is going to defend his document, he will have to be prepared to defend the footnotes too. It is there where the strengths and weaknesses of the Mueller report are most clearly on display. Come Wednesday’s hearings, the advantage may go to the questioners who know where to look.

Felton demonstrates just how shaky the entire Mueller investigation is. He further demonstrates how the Mueller team was perfectly willing to rely on hearsay and innuendo when it reflected badly on Trump, but were less interested when clear factual evidence existed that might yield a different conclusion. Read the whole thing.

It's highly likely that today's hearing will yield exactly nothing new. Sure, the Dems will tell us that this "new" testimony is a clear cut indictment of Trump and that IMPEACHMENT is required. They'll further tell us that 'our nation is in peril,' that 'democracy itself is under threat,' and that only they—pure of heart and the pinnacle of honesty—can save us from a "lawless" president and his minions.

Yawn.