Whenever we get lost in the endless, fatiguing rightwing ■■■■■■■■ on this–and other, related topics–I can’t help but think of this tweet (which is still up) from Erick Erickson, who’s supposed to be one of the “smart” ones. It suggests so much about where we are, and the state of this discussion, generally.
Everybody…we aren’t high enough to be privy to what’s actually going on at the highest levels of our government but don’t ever forget one fact, you know for sure. Three days before the decision to indict Hillary was announced, Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton, secretly, on a tarmac and claimed what they were discussing was grand children and golf scores. When exposed, Loretta would not recuse herself. Then Comey, the head of the FBI, did something that historically I don’t ever recall being done…did the AGs job. These are some of the facts that we do know and they can’t be explained away. It isn’t normal and exposes clearly, to anybody who chooses to open their eyes…“we” have a problem.
Yet those facts have been investigated throughly and no crimes have been found.
Really? The potentially guilty, investigated themselves and you’re satisfied with that? I’m done here.
He has maybe taught us that we don’t actually really even need a President at all.
And for two years you still have zero evidence that Rosenstein is in a plot to take out the President of the United States. I’m sorry, but I refuse to besmirch our Law Enforcement officials and institutions without evidence. Now if there is evidence of wrong doing, absolutely, count me in in condemning them and demanding they are held to account. Like I did with McCabe. But not before. I was raised to honor and defend our nation’s laws and the professionals who have devoted and risked their lives in upholding them. I will not attack them just because some sleazy politician is being investigated.
And maybe Fox, etc report things in a manner that is constantly dramatic and the conspiracy guys always fall for it.
Which won’t stop because it works.
Could you please link to the judge saying this because it it appears you are purposely confusing this with what the judge said about Manafort.
The judge who was judging Manafort’s case said this regarding the real purpose of the investigation into Manafort was to impeach Trump.
That’s not even remotely the same thing as you said earlier.
And another judge said it was entirely within the scope’s mandate
I love that Trump State Television tried to include this as one of Trump’s accomplishments.
Do you ever notice, you spend a lot of time “interpreting” what I said, while applying your slant?
That’s what happens when you are consumed with hate, would be my guess.
Can I take a wild stab at this?
Because there is no there there?
no image…do tell…what is it?
That wasn’t the final ruling or opinion in the case. That was the judge challenging the prosecutors.
The man who never recanted his use of fake Soros quotes, goes “all in for facts.” Yep, everyone’s totally buying that.
Yup, just look how Obama sicced the Justice department on Bush, McCain and Romney.