Fair reading

Writing for the American Spectator, former federal prosecutor George Parry provides a valuable service by pointing out what is obvious:

So, what did Trump do that for the thousandth time has summoned the furies of Le Résistance de la Gauche?

He — gasp — declined to publicly scold and insult Putin to his face and questioned the probity of our intelligence community, i.e., the deep state cabal who have been trying for the past three years to frame him for colluding with the Russians. In doing so, he pointed out the obvious fact that these ongoing efforts to destroy him have complicated and impeded his ability to conduct foreign policy especially in regard to this nation’s fraught relations with Russia, the world’s second largest nuclear power.

He was even so unpatriotic as to question the basis for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s latest pretend indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers which — to put it kindly — appears to be the product of questionable investigative work. Most tellingly, he asked how Team Mueller had determined that the Russians had hacked the Democratic National Committee’s computer when the DNC has forbidden law enforcement access to its server. This is a not inconsiderable question. 

Parry is reading things correctly I noticed one thing about Trump's remarks that stand out. He tweeted the following:

"MY" does not equal John Brennan

Trump also mentioned Dan Coats, the Director of National Intelligence, by name. Coats has to manage a lot of people who are gunning for his boss, but he can't really get rid of those people easily, or even at all in many cases.

It may not be possible to completely reform the Swamp. Its denizens are intelligent, resourceful, remorseless, and ruthless. There are thousands of Peter Strzoks in Washington, willing to do whatever they can to stop this administration from succeeding. Cleaning them out is a big job.

Eleventy

Taking a deep breath here. Trump and Putin. Thoughts? Why yes, I have a few:

• Did anyone think Trump was going to bash Putin from the podium yesterday? Really? How would that have worked?
• Putin doesn't have the strong hand here. He never will, really. The oligarchs who really run Russia will accept his strutting around so long as it is beneficial to them. The minute it isn't, he's gone. Trump certainly knows this.
• Last I checked, we weren't actually at war with Russia. Anyone who is shouting "treason" at this point is assuming facts not in evidence.
• Did the Russians meddle in the 2016 elections? Of course. I'd be more surprised if they hadn't. Governments always prefer to pick the person across the table. Obama never liked Netanyahu and sent his operatives to get involved in the Israeli election. The CIA, apparently back in fashion, had no trouble getting rid of Salvador Allende, and Jacobo Arbenz, and Mohammad Mossadegh. There were others. Hillary Clinton positively gloated about her role in getting rid of Gaddafi in Libya. Given how our government has conducted itself, it would be an upset if other countries weren't trying to put their thumb on the scale of our elections.
• Personally, I would have phrased things differently were I at the podium. I'm not, though. I'm sitting at my dining room table, tapping on a laptop. I am not privy to the information Trump has at his disposal. It's possible Trump is a Russian stooge, but it's not likely. There is no reason to be one if you are President of the United States.