President Trump had a rough ride recently as it came to the Russian probe. He definitely received some highs and some lows based on media reports.
A Federal Judge favored a decision to dismiss a suit which claimed that Trump and others were responsible for releasing emails.
Democrats had claimed that former adviser Roger Stone colluded with WikiLeaks and the Russian Government.
On the downside the Senate Committee concluded that Russian were responsible for election meddling. The conclusion was a contradiction to what the House Committee said they found upon investigation.
These findings were certainly mind-boggling as it left a sense of uncertainty.
Senate Committee
The committee gave a summary on the evidence they reviewed concerning Russia’s alleged involvement in the U.S. 2016 election.
“The Committee has spent the last 16 months reviewing the sources, tradecraft and analytic work underpinning the Intelligence Community Assessment and sees no reason to dispute the conclusions,” said Chairman Richard Burr.
The contradictions by two separate committees in Government are caused for concerned. These findings won’t help Trump in his claim of no collusion.
“A body of reporting, to include different intelligence disciplines, open source reporting on Russian leadership policy preferences, and Russian media content, showed that Moscow sought to denigrate Secretary Clinton,” the summary read.
Democrat Mike Quigley said “I’ve come to the conclusion that what the Russians did was, as a wise man said, the political equivalent of 9/11. And our response to that is probably more important and will have more profound impacts on our country going forward.”
Judge Ruling
Federal Judge Ellen Huvelle dismissed a suit by the Democrats against Trump and his campaign during the 2016 election.
“The Trump Campaign’s efforts to elect President Trump in D.C. are not suit-related contacts for those efforts did not involve acts taken in furtherance of the conspiracies to disseminate emails that harmed plaintiffs,” wrote Huvelle.
“Campaign meetings, canvassing voters, and other regular business activities of a political campaign do not constitute activities related to the conspiracies alleged in the complaint,” she added.
The judge made it clear this verdict wasn’t to deny any collusion but rather this wasn’t the place for the lawsuit.
“It bears emphasizing that this Court’s ruling is not based on a finding that there was no collusion between defendants and Russia during the 2016 presidential election,” Huvelle wrote. “This is the wrong forum for plaintiffs’ lawsuit. The Court takes no position on the merits of plaintiffs’ claims.”