Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I don’t think there will be collusion involving him directly. I think this latest Cohen admission is Trump trying to cover up a business deal that might create a conflict of interest investigation. That’s different from collusion.
It’s a classic “cover up is worse than crime” scenario.
I think he’s just dumb enough to have had no idea there was a crime/fraud exception to atty/client privilege, or that Cohen could be made to talk.
|
Since the word "collusion" is ambiguous, it's hard for me to tell what you think we're not going to find. The big picture is that Trump had financial dealings with the Russians, directly involving the Russian government, for some time, and at the same time has used his position (as a candidate and as the President) to benefit Russia. Are you saying there won't be proof of an express quid pro quo? If there isn't, and there is proof that (e.g.) Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress, it's not that the cover-up is *worse* than the crime -- the crime is still worse, but he gets nailed for the things that prosecutors can prove.
Anyway, the idea that there's no evidence of collusion is laughable. It's right in front of us.
