The Senate Intel Committee, why now?

[kentuck]

Why did they feel compelled to come out at this time and declare that there was no "direct evidence" of any collusion by the Trump Administration??

Actually, it was the Chairman, Richard Burr, that made the pronouncement that there was no direct evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Senator Mark Warner, Democrat from Virginia, disagreed with the way Burr characterized the evidence about collusion.

In my opinion, Chairman Burr has had a secret discussion with Donald Trump again. He was recruited by Trump, when the story first broke, to sell Trump's story to the media. It was discovered and the story soon died.

But, we should ask, why would Donald Trump make such a request to Richard Burr at this time? Why the urgency?

Did he make his announcement because Donald Trump asked him to do it?

Was this a move by Trump to minimize or to shut down the next move by Robert Mueller? Perhaps?

There is a smell coming from the Senate Intel Committee.

==============================

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-has-uncovered-no-direct-evidence-conspiracy-between-trump-campaign-n970536

[Squinch]

1. Read Seth Abramson analyses of Burr's comments. Burr actually said

just about the opposite of what people are saying he said.

[manor321]

2. Many other threads have covered this

It is a stupid Ken Dilanian article. John Brennan says the committee doesn't have access to what Mueller has. Senator Warren disagrees with Burr. Natasha Bertrand threw cold water on Ken's dumb report. etc. etc.

[kentuck]

3. Did Burr not make those comments?

If he did, why?

[Gothmog]

4. From Prof. Tribe

Link to tweet