UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

may of missed their comments...here's an excerpt that covers the debate well...in essence MAGAs cling desperately to semantics instead of the actual facts uncovered...how would you describe the case of Trump's Campaign Manager, Paul Manafort, handing internal campaign polling data to a Russian Operative, Konstantin Kilimnik?...What possible benign purpose would that serve...vs...an effort to allow Russia to target regions of the U.S. with misinformation that favored Trump's candidacy?
------------------
The fifth and final volume of the Select Intelligence Committee’s bipartisan report on Russian interference in the 2016 election is an incredibly long and detailed document. At a whopping 966 pages, volume 5 alone is more than twice the length of the Mueller report, and it covers a great deal more ground.


It is important for another reason: Along with the shorter volumes 1-4, the Senate’s report is the only credible account of the events of 2016 to which Republican elected officials have signed their names. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in a press release praised the report on the investigation he set in motion way back in December 2016, saying, “I commend my colleagues on both sides for keeping their work out of the partisan spotlight and focused on the facts.” McConnell, in the same press release, echoes the statements of Acting Committee Chairman Marco Rubio, stating that “[t]heir report reaffirms Special Counsel Mueller’s finding that President Trump did not collude with Russia.”


It is a bit of a mug’s game at this point to fight over whether what either Mueller or the Intelligence Committee found constitutes collusion and, if so, in what sense. The question turns almost entirely on what one means by the term “collusion”—a word without any precise meaning in the context of campaign engagement with foreign actors interfering with an election.


So rather than engaging over whether the Intelligence Committee found collusion, we decided to read the document with a focus on identifying precisely what the committee found about the engagement over a long period of time between Trump and his campaign and Russian government or intelligence actors and their cut-outs.


Whether one describes this activity as collusion or not, there’s a lot of it: The report describes hundreds of actions by Trump, his campaign, and his associates in the run-up to the 2016 election that involve some degree of participation by Trump or his associates in Russian activity. In this post—which we are generating serially as we read through the document—we attempt to summarize, precisely and comprehensively, what the eight Republicans on the committee, along with their seven Democratic colleagues, report that the president, members of his campaign and his associates actually did.


One overarching note: There is a fair amount of overlap between this document and the Mueller report. But the Senate report covers a fair bit more ground for a few reasons. For one thing, it was not limited to information it could prove beyond a reasonable doubt in court, as Mueller was. Just as important, the committee included counterintelligence questions in its investigative remit—whereas Mueller limited himself to a review of criminal activity. So the document reads less like a prosecution memo and more like an investigative report addressing risk assessment questions. This volume is an attempt to describe comprehensively the counterintelligence threats and vulnerabilities associated with Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. So it’s inherently a little more free-wheeling and speculative.
------------------

You have to know they "Colluded"...you just don't want to admit it...shows how much integrity and honor you have...or concern for the safety of this country when our worst enemy goes to these lengths to get Trump elected... (i.e. not much)...oh, one more thing...the Intel Committee was led by the GOP...this was not an endeavor as part of of criminal investigation...while the evidence of "Collusion" was overwhelming, there's no way that the Republicans in control could use that word and indict Trump...if they didn't have to.


Link: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/collusion-reading-diary-what-did-senate-intelligence-committee-find