Dem Rep Defends Premature Collusion Allegations as ‘Completely Valid’
Representative Katie Hill (D., Calif.) defended her colleagues’ past assertions of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia on Monday, telling CNN’s Alisyn Camerota the claim remains “completely valid” despite special counsel Robert Mueller’s failure to produce any evidence to substantiate the charge.
Hill was asked whether her Democratic colleagues, including House Judiciary chairman Jerry Nadler and House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, should apologize for asserting without evidence that Trump campaign officials colluded with Russians to sway the election in Trump’s favor.
“I wouldn’t say that they need to apologize. They are still stating things that happened in plain sight. The definition of collusion as a legal term is on that is completely nebulous,” Hill said. “So, I think the suspicions that have been had by both the Democrats in Congress and people across the country are completely valid. Whether it was intentional or not, Trump and his associates were conducting themselves in a way that was highly, highly suspicious both during the election and after that made it so that this investigation needed to happen.”
Hill’s comments come one day after attorney general William Barr delivered to Congress a four-page letter that summarized his “principal conclusions” after reviewing the Mueller report and exonerated Trump on the question of collusion.
“Special counsel did not find anyone with the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government,” Barr wrote.
The Mueller report does not, however, exonerate Trump on the obstruction of justice charge, but Barr determined independently that there was not sufficient evidence of that crime to produce an indictment.
“While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” reads a section of the report pertaining to the obstruction issue, according to Barr.
