Bob Woodward, whose bestselling anti-Trump book Fear has got Washington tongues wagging, told talk show host Hugh Hewitt on Friday that despite looking “hard” for two years, he could find no evidence of collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians in the 2016 presidential election.
HH: So let’s set aside the Comey firing, which as a Constitutional law professor, no one will ever persuade me can be obstruction. And Rod Rosenstein has laid out reasons why even if those weren’t the president’s reasons. Set aside the Comey firing. Did you, Bob Woodward, hear anything in your research in your interviews that sounded like espionage or collusion?
BW: I did not, and of course, I looked for it, looked for it hard. And so you know, there we are. We’re going to see what Mueller has, and Dowd may be right. He has something that Dowd and the president don’t know about, a secret witness or somebody who has changed their testimony. As you know, that often happens, and that can break open or turn a case.
HH: But you’ve seen no collusion?
BW: I have not.
Woodward isn’t the only one who couldn’t find the pony under the pile of manure. Lisa Page told a House committee that the FBI also tried their best to find enough evidence of collusion to bring a case against Trump and his campaign and failed.
Yet, when history judges the former FBI lawyer years from now, her most consequential pronouncement may not have been typed on her bureau-issued Samsung smartphone to her colleague and lover.
Rather, it might be eight simple words she uttered behind closed doors during a congressional interview a few weeks ago.
“It’s a reflection of us still not knowing,” Page told Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) when questioned about texts she and Strzok exchanged in May 2017 as Robert Mueller was being named a special prosecutor to take over the Russia investigation.
With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia’s election meddling.
Page opined further, acknowledging “it still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing” to connect Trump and Russia, no matter what Mueller or the FBI did.
“As far as May of 2017, we still couldn’t answer the question,” she said at another point.
Page sounds a little disappointed that there may be “literally nothing” to the collusion narrative.
But with Woodward coming up empty and Page admitting the FBI can’t make a case, why does the left get so excited whenever a Trump crony pleads guilty and makes an immunity deal with Mueller? Trump is “trapped.” He’s “worried.” It’s close to the end. He can’t escape. He’s losing it. There is gleeful anticipation that Mueller will show Trump won the election because Russia helped him and the president will be impeached because of it.
Meanwhile, there is no witness who has come forward with any testimony or evidence of Trump colluding with Russia. There has been no leak from the special counsel’s office that suggests collusion. No congressman or senator on the intelligence committees has said there is any evidence of collusion. There has been no leak from Congress that would point to collusion.
So why this continued hysteria about collusion? In truth, this is more about denial on the left for the reasons they lost the presidency in 2016 than it is about a president committing treason.
Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump because she was the worst major party candidate for president in modern history. She had nothing to say and nothing to offer voters except that she would make history as the first woman president if she won. She was the least trusted presidential candidate since polling began.
These factors alone would have made her election very difficult. In the end, voters rejected her and what little she offered as far as ideas.
What do you suppose is going to happen on the left when Mueller issues his final report with no bombshell collusion charge?