There have been accusations and official investigations of colluding with the Russians on the 2016 election and obstruction of justice against Trump and those around him. Cries of outrage and condemnation echo through the Democrats and the media almost hourly.
One might reasonably ponder as to where were the cries and condemnation by Democrats and the media when President Obama, using taxpayer dollars, waged a concerted effort against Benjamin Netanyahu during his election cycle for Prime Minister of Israel!?
Now, it is obvious that 2 wrongs do not a right make. However, the Obama actions are provable; on the Trump actions? - Not one shred of evidence.
To date there exists absolutely no evidence to support any collusion between Trump or his campaign with Russian "operatives" or officials.
Even former FBI director, James Comey, in his testimony confirms this, as even this progressive admits.
On the issue of "obstruction of justice", this stems from Comey's reported conversation with Trump where Trump allegedly states to Comey, "'I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."
To me, "hope" is hardly obstruction. This is especially true as the President of The United States has the authority to have such a case dropped - it's called prosecutorial discretion. Many legal experts in this country seem to agree.
Even as I pen this article (mid-June 2017), an investigation by a special council is underway into possible collusion with the Russians by Trump, et. al., and, it has been reported, into obstruction of justice by Trump for his firing of James Comey (which by the way, is the purview of the President - at the President's "pleasure").
A look at even more factual events may shed more light on this entire subject.
1. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, in early March 2016, recused himself of any involvement with cases dealing with Republican or Trump issues surrounding the 2016 election.
2. Trump appoints Rod Rosenstein to replace Sessions as (acting) Attorney General.
3. Rosenstein writes a memo to Trump advocating the firing of James Comey - head of the FBI.
4. Trump fires Comey.
5. Assumedly due to unknown (by me) political pressure from somewhere, Rosenstein commissions former FBI Director Robert Mueller to head up an investigation into Trump.
Recognizing the strangeness of such a move, Trump tweeted this:
6. Subsequent to Mueller's appointment, it has been shown that Mueller has, and has had, a personal relationship with James Comey. This fact alone should have caused Mueler to recuse himself. No such has occurred.
7. And, as if to add insult to injury, Mueller has hired (so far) 13 lawyers to assist him - some of these lawyers having close ties to Hillary Clinton, et. al., and have donated heavily to the Democrat Party. "Fairness"? "Objectivity"? Hardly!
8. It is being argued that even Rosenstein, himself, should recuse himself from any involvement with the on-going investigations. Rosenstein, in fact, may be called as a witness in the investigation he is supposedly overseeing.
Next to last is this.
An (in)famous quote from Lavrentiy Beria, head of the old Soviet Union's NKVD (i.e., secret police) under Joseph Stalin, seems to be at play here: "Show me the man, and I will find you the crime." An article, Linked Here, provides some context into the concept of this entire "probe" into Trump's supposed collusion with the Russians.
It seems that Trump's political enemies will keep looking until they find something, anything, even it what they find has no relation to any such "collusion". If these probes do nothing but cast unfounded assertons against Trump, politically such will have served to discredit Trump.
No, Marcellus' quote from 'Hamlet' (Act 1, Scene 4) seems appropriate here: