I was actually kind of sympathetic to this viewpoint throughout Mueller. Those efforts by the Trump campaign bore similarities to standard campaign oppo research. That said: There’s a good reason to doubt information that comes from Russia and D.J.T. Jr.’s response to that Russian lawyer’s solicitation of incriminating anti-HRC information was beyond credulous. Even though nothing substantive ever came out of it.
But: There’s a big difference between running for President and having campaign staff talk to a Russian lawyer, vs. actually *being* president and asking a foreign counterpart, on your first phone call ever with them, to open an investigation on a political rival’s son all on the basis of little or flimsy evidence. Which is what Trump did in Ukraine.
Got solid information of corruption on Hunter Biden’s part? Get our FBI to look into it. Or let the Ukrainian authorities decide that without undue presidential pressure and tacit threats to revoke critical military aid. Or even just let Burisma handle it as an internal matter. Even if Hunter Biden were corrupt (and he's not), this is plainly not a national security concern that would justify the personal involvement of POTUS. Which is also why the Trump Administration's constant invocation of executive privilege is unfounded in this instance.
The difference between Russiagate and Ukrainegate is the difference between the amateurish and haphazard efforts of a presidential campaign staffer vs. the direct exercise of presidential power (against the expressed will of Congress) by someone 2.5 years into his presidential term who should have known better.
And in neither case was there any actual substance to the foreign information.
Caption this Meme