INFORMATION VACUUM INSIDE TRUMP RUSSIA CONTROVERSY
Put aside, for a moment, the raging controversies over this or that aspect of Donald Trump, the Russians and the election. And then ask: What do we know about the allegation at the heart of the matter: Did Trump, his campaign aides or his associates collude with Russians to influence the 2016 campaign?
The answer is, we know nothing. After all the investigating, after all the talk, after all the yelling — the public knows nothing.
The most definitive statement of the current situation came Sunday on NBCs “Meet the Press.” James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, admitted that he does not know of any evidence that proves collusion, or even points toward collusion.
“Does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials?” NBC’s Chuck Todd asked Clapper.
“We did not include any evidence in our report … that had anything, that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians,” Clapper answered. “There was no evidence of that included in our report.”
“I understand that, but does it exist?” asked Todd.
“Not to my knowledge,” said Clapper.
“If it existed, it would have been in the report?” asked Todd.
“This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government,” Clapper responded. “But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.”
It appears as if there is an information vacuum at the core of the Russia election controversy. Everybody is talking about things they don’t even know happened.
The vacuum has not stopped President Trump’s accusers, who are suggesting there is incriminating evidence of collusion the public has not seen. “There are transcripts that provide very helpful, very critical insights into whether or not Russian intelligence or senior Russian political leaders — including Vladimir Putin — were cooperating, were colluding, with the Trump campaign at the highest levels to influence the outcome of our election,” Democratic Sen. Chris Coons told MSNBC Friday. “I believe they exist.”
The problem, for Coons, and other Democrats, is that his belief might not be based in fact. On Sunday, facing questions from Fox News’ Chris Wallace, Coons went into full retreat.
Wallace asked this: “Do you have any evidence … do you know of any hard evidence of collusion between what I call Trump-World and the Russians to interfere in this presidential campaign??”
“Chris, I have no hard evidence of collusion,” Coons answered. “I think what hard evidence there may be will be discovered either through a full release of President Trump’s financial interests and concerns and taxes, or the intercepts that I believe our intelligence community and FBI have of conversations between and among Russian officials.”
The Coons “Fox News Sunday” interview could prove a revealing moment in the Trump Russia election affair. When Coons admitted that he had seen no evidence of collusion, where did he suggest it might be? In the president’s tax returns. Just how that might be possible is not clear. But there is no doubt Democrats work every day to pressure Trump to release his taxes. If Democrats come up with a dry hole on the Russia election matter, they might, like Coons, just seamlessly segue to Trump’s taxes.
To be clear, it’s possible that incontrovertible evidence of collusion exists somewhere in the government’s classified investigation machine. It might be that the FBI director, or some other official, will soon release information to settle the question once and for all. But right now, even as there are calls to escalate the investigation, some very knowledgeable people are beginning to admit they know of nothing there.
Recently an anonymous Washington politico told Axios’ Mike Allen of the Russia election case, “This is the rare case where the smoke IS the fire.” That’s clever, but no, the smoke is not the fire. The fire is the fire. And right now, no one seems to know if there is any fire at all.
Byron York is chief political correspondent for The Washington Examiner.