I think it'd be t least as useful to go back to the date Hillary first alleged Russian tampering and collusion with Trump's campaign.
She was into that meme before most of us voted.
The United States was not in a state of war with Russia in 2016 and they had normal diplomatic relations. I think the onus is on the critics to put into clear language exactly what wrongdoing they presume has taken place when anybody talks with the Russian ambassador. Why should any of us be prevented from talking to any citizen of Russia if we choose to do so? It’s not like North Korea or even Iran and I doubt that anyone would be under a microscope for chatting with the Iranian delegation to the United Nations, for example.
This is one of those lawfare pursuits where mountains of evidence take the place of actual torts, I’ve seen this in my own experience and the game is simply to have a lot of evidence and try to create a general stink about something vague “in the background” without actually saying what that is. In this case, it could be nothing more than somebody’s efforts to break the ice in what they thought might become a strategic partnership, if for example a person like Flynn saw a benefit from working with Russia in the Middle East.
And behind all of this speculation, what’s the answer to the question of what Obama meant when he told Medvedev in his first term that he could “do more in (his) second term” — like what could he do? What did he do?
Agreed, probably back to when she tweeted that “computer scientist” had informed her that Russia hacked Podesta’s emails. I think that was around the time that Bill met with the DOJ.