As the likelihood of the charges of Trump campaign “collusion” with Russia seems headed toward zero, the likelihood of proof of a different form of “collusion” seems headed upward toward certainty.
Now, there’s talk that Mueller is winding up his investigation. Whenever he finishes, it seems unlikely his work will fulfill the daydreams so many liberals have of making Trump go the way of Richard Nixon. Meanwhile, the evidence builds of collusion by the Obama administration's law enforcement and intelligence personnel in trying to elect Hillary Clinton and defeat and delegitimize Donald Trump in and after the 2016 presidential election.
Comey informed Trump in January 2017 of the contents of the then-unpublished Steele memorandum, he didn’t reveal that the Clinton campaign paid for it. Asked on his book tour why not, he blandly said he didn’t know. Maybe he doesn’t actually realize he was employing tactics reminiscent of J. Edgar Hoover in a bid to keep his job. Maybe.
In any case, after he was fired, he immediately sent four of his internal memos, at least one of them classified, to a law professor friend to leak them to the press, with the intent of getting a special counsel appointed — who turned out to be his longtime friend and ally, Robert Mueller. Collusion, anyone?
Collusion can get complicated and sometimes fail to produce the intended results. Comey’s deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe reportedly kept to himself for weeks the discovery that Clinton emails were transmitted over the home computer of her aide Huma Abedin’s then-husband, the disgraced ex-Congressman Anthony Weiner. It was after Comey learned of this that he made his Oct. 28 announcement that the Clinton email investigation was being reopened.
Comey and McCabe have produced contradictory accounts of events, and Comey’s public praise of McCabe contrasts with his referral of McCabe to Justice’s inspector general, who found him guilty of “lack of candor” — a fireable offense for which he was indeed fired. Partners in collusion sometimes fall out.
Longtime Clinton friend Lanny Davis charges that Comey’s statement was responsible for Clinton’s defeat, and Comey on his book tour admitted that he may have made it only because he assumed Clinton would win.
Davis may be right, though no one can prove it. But one can also say that the Democratic Party lost the presidency because it nominated a candidate under investigation for committing a felony.
Read it all @ Michael Barone