MUELLER HAS NOT INTERVIEWED HER!!!
Pay CLOSE attention to the people Mueller DOESN'T talk to!!!
Sigh...A trap can only be set, the target still has to decide to take the bait. President Trump categorically denied any collusion. If there was no collusion, then there can be no entrapment. An entrapment scheme requires the solicitation of illegal activity by a government agent. Had the Trump campaign been approached by solicitation of illegal activity by an individual representing themselves to be an agent of a foreign government, the Trump campaign would have been obligated to report that solicitation to the FBI. This obligation is not necessarily a legal obligation. A citizen approached by individuals representing themselves as agents of a foreign government attempting to interfere in our elections would have an unambiguous moral obligation to report such a solicitation. No such report was made by the Trump campaign.
In the absence of a report of an illegal solicitation, one must either dismiss the allegations of an entrapment scheme or else be prepared to confront some extremely uncomfortable implications. If you believe that the FBI sought to entrap the Trump campaign then you must believe that the entrapment was successful. There really is no other plausible conclusion. We know of Trump Jr’s expressed interest in receiving information represented as part of the Russian government’s efforts on behalf of the Trump campaign. We also know that the campaign did not report being approached by individuals representing themselves as foreign agents. Given the known facts, it is apparent that any entrapment scheme would have been successful.
All of which is to say that if you believe there was an FBI entrapment scheme, you must believe the Trump campaign believed it was colluding with the Russian government and that the categorical denials of said collusion were lies. Furthermore, a claim of entrapment is only a defense against the crimes the entrapment scheme induced. Therefore, if you believe there was entrapment then you believe President Trump obstructed justice. This is an inescapable conclusion unless you believe the President was unaware of the activities of his own campaign. If entrapment occurred, then the President would have believed he colluded with the Russians. His categorical denials would then be lies. If he lied about his knowledge of what he believed to be collusion then his actions regarding the investigation can not be viewed as anything but obstruction. Furthermore, the admission that the President dictated the response to the media regarding the Trump Tower meeting would amount to both obstruction and witness tampering as defined by federal statute.
Do you believe any of that? I believe the President’s categorical denial. So why is this being pushed? If the allegations of entrapment are true, then Trump would have a moral duty to resign. If this is going to be the defense, then Pence should start boxing up his stuff since he will be upgrading his residence in short order. The defense to this Russian nonsense should be an unqualified claim of innocence. So far it has been. So why the hell are we pushing this thread? Entrapment equals collusion, pure and simple. I swear, the most dire threat to this administration are all the ADHD addled so-called allies that are incapable of staying on script. Not every news cycle needs a new conspiracy. If innocence is not the President’s defense, then the President is indefensible. Think things through people.
Veselnitskaya is an interesting subplot. Disclosure of her visa requests and approvals would certainly shine some light into this mess. Who made the decision and in what time frame to allow a her into the country with a regular business visa after being allowed in under the more restrictive probationary visa. The feds might cut some corners like letting Norks into the country, but are they going to do the same for some supposedly private attorney from Russia?