[NYT] Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence

Is it possible to prove that case sufficiently to give someone like you or me confidence he isn't compromised? If he releases his tax returns (which, as an aside, I'm surprised haven't completely leaked yet. No Obama moles in the IRS?) and there are no Russian shell companies on it, does that satisfy you that he's clean? I wouldn't be. He needs a good (and not nefarious) explanation for why so many of his people were meeting with Russians, and then back that up with some detail on each of those engagements and how they achieved that purpose. Even then, there is still plenty of opportunity for omissions, especially considering having to explain why Putin leaked DNC documents to help Trump win. So whatever the explanation, it has to also somehow include that he was not only not complicit in that strategy but opposed it. I am not imaginative enough to come up with a story that satisfies all those requirements. So, sure I'd be happy to learn that Trump was not compromised, but I honestly don't think I'd ever believe it.

 

Fair question, but if there was bipartisan sentiment after the investigations that nothing was worrisome, that would really help placate me. I don't pretend to have all the data that intelligence agencies will present to the congressional committees. Having the conclusion that "we don't have reasonable evidence of collusion" between Trump campaign and the Russians would be good.

And yes, tax returns and the knowledge that he didn't owe his left leg to Russian mob would be good.

It is still possible that Putin wanted to help him b/c:
(1) his cronies felt more comfortable with many of Trump's cronies.
(2) Trump is as close to a white nationalist as we're going to get (I'd hope).
(3) Trump subverts a lot of normal operating parameters for America.

That's enough motivation (and it's putting it nicely). It's a better scenario than open collusion and/or Trump being truly compromised by either information or money or both.

Josh Marshall has written some interesting pieces on the Occam's Razor approach to this, and it isn't that slimy a picture. (Posted earlier in this thread.)