POLITICO Tells Readers to 'Prepare for Disappointment' Concerning Mueller Probe

Nick Kangadis | October 19, 2018
Font Size

Remember when CNN’s Van Jones called the whole President Trump/Russian collusion saga a big “nothing burger?”



Apparently, that “nothing burger” could come with all the toppings you want, because POLITICO published an article on Friday telling people to “prepare for disappointment.”

POLITICO reported:

That’s the word POLITICO got from defense lawyers working on the Russia probe and more than 15 former government officials with investigation experience spanning Watergate to the 2016 election case. The public, they say, shouldn’t expect a comprehensive and presidency-wrecking account of Kremlin meddling and alleged obstruction of justice by Trump — not to mention an explanation of the myriad subplots that have bedeviled lawmakers, journalists and amateur Mueller sleuths.

Perhaps most unsatisfying: Mueller’s findings may never even see the light of day.

People need to remember that the Mueller probe into potential Russian interference in the 2016 election is a legal investigation. You might not get the information or transparency you’re looking for, even though we should all just be looking for the truth and not some shred of evidence where one side can say, “Got ya!”

“That’s just the way this works,” said John Q. Barrett, former associate counsel who worked under independent counsel Lawrence Walsh during the Reagan-era investigation into secret arms sales to Iran, according to POLITICO. “Mueller is a criminal investigator. He’s not government oversight, and he’s not a historian.”

Both sides of the collusion debate have been frothing at the mouth for any concrete information as to whether the 2016 Trump campaign had any help from Russian agents in getting elected to the highest office in the world.

If you take POLITICO says seriously, then you’re probably going to get the disappointment they’re predicting people need to prepare for.

The POLITICO article also reported:

When Mueller is finished, he must turn in a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” — essentially why he chose to bring charges against some people but not others. His reasoning, according to veterans of such investigations, could be as simple as “there wasn’t enough evidence” to support a winning court case.

All we’ve heard from the “unbiased” media is that Trump and his administration are evil, so they must have needed help from foreign entities to knock off failed Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

Eventually, we’re going to find out whether there was actual wrongdoing by the Trump administration or if the whole investigation was put in place because Leftists couldn’t get over the results of the 2016 election.