I’m going to tell you a quick story to (hopefully) prove a point. Some will get it, some won’t. C’est la vie.
******
I’m a high school chemistry teacher.
I got lung cancer.
I thought I might die. It occurred to me that if I did die, my family would likely be destitute.
So what I did was, I started cooking blue meth.
Some folks got wind of what I was doing and started asking questions. In order to deflect those questions, I accused my brother-in-law (who’s a DEA agent) of illegally tapping my home phone.
That was a lie. He wasn’t tapping my home phone and although my intentions were good when I started cooking blue meth, I’m still a criminal.
More people ask questions about me and my meth. Specifically, about me and my connections to Mexican drug cartels.
I double down on the story about my brother-in-law and the illegal wiretapping. I demand that the DEA investigate this matter to prove that it’s not me that’s the criminal, but rather my corrupt brother-in-law.
No one can find any evidence that my brother-in-law in fact wiretapped my phone.
Later, it turns out that while tapping the phones of the Mexican cartels to whom I sell my blue meth, my name came up.
My response: “I feel vindicated.”
*****
yea, I got it. Classic!
Trump will continue to feel “somewhat” vindicated until the details of the communications that Flynn, Manafort, Page and possibly Trump had with their Russian friends are released to the public.
Except for the part that Nunes stated “Russia” was mentioned no where in the reports that had been circulated, and that Trump associates had been unmasked (which is illegal under FISA) and that he was concerned about why incidental evidence concerning the private conversations and FISA protected identities of these American citizens had been widely disseminated among intelligence agencies…
“It’s not a duck, I swear!”