Why the Cohen testimony did not work against Trump

After endless hype, special counsel Robert Mueller may be about to submit his report. It is impossible to know what his conclusions will be. But after so much speculation, one outcome seems likely: Mueller will disappoint just about everyone — especially President Trump’s critics. And it won’t be his fault.
This is due in part to Trump’s successful disinformation crusade, which has worked to raise a nearly impossible and definitely illogical bar for Mueller to clear: proving “collusion” and charging a grand criminal conspiracy involving the Trump campaign and the Russian government. But it is also due to Trump’s critics, who have responded to Trump’s “No collusion!” mantra by shouting back, “Yes, collusion!”

Editor:  This article does not mention the fact of Mueller's disappointment due to LACK OF EVIDENCE.   The pamphlet,  Time Magazine,  has this bit of bias reporting (above).  It is laughable in spite of being fairly accurate in its major premise.   I say "laughable"  because only one side will be disappointed,  and that is opposition.  Everyone knew that Trump has had "issues" in his personal life.  The great unkown was the fact that after two years of digging,  the Dems could not get passed the common knowledge of Trumps "transgressions."  But more than this,  the fact remains that there is nothing knew being discovered. 

Look at the next list of "witnesses."  It includes family members,  lawyers who are on record in their support of Trump such as Jay Sekulow, and one of his most outspoken supporters,  Sean Hannity.  None of these people are remotely stupid.  Not one of them has been implicated in anything illegal or Russian related.  Most importantly,  all have been interviewed by Robert Mueller.   Adam Schiff will find out nothing new.  His three day interview of Cohen has proven this to be true. 

I stopped watching the Cohen nonsense the second he said
that Trump had threatened his opponents with physical violence more than 150 times.  If these were real threats,  there would have a few murders in aftermath   . . . .    too many threats for there not to be.  So if you believe that part of his testimoney,  you will believe anything. 

The only question that remains is this:  why did Cohen agree to this testimony?  And,  there are only two choces:  One,  an effort to rehibiliatate his reptation with an eye decreasing his sentence,   Or, two,  an effort to rehibilatate his pathetic lying reputation for money. 

One thing for certain,  the Dems went with this piece of scum as their number one witness because they have no one else.  And we have to listen to two more years of this crap.