that caused him to originally believe that Trump was colluding with Russia, and he only responded by stating that Trump did not like the FBI investigating his alleged ties with Russia and that Trump wanted to shut the investigation down. Guthrie brings McCabe back on point and asks him what facts caused the FBI to *start* the investigation in the first place, and he can't answer because he'd have to point to the phony dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton.
He should be in jail.
Link: https://twitter.com/TODAYshow/status/1097840253682024450
Mueller hasn't got squat either.
(no message)
Savannah doesn't get it. She asked why they SUSPECTED Trump and McCabe answered her=undermining it, witchhunt, leave Flynn alone, etc., this caused them to SUSPECT Trump and open an investigation. What caused you to suspect Trump is not the same as what PROOF do you have Trump was working for Russia.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Unfortunately we will never fully know everything that they had to suspect the traitor as they won’t disclose it.
We might already know essentially everything...then again, his book was subject to pre-publication review and there is obviously lots he can't discuss.
We do know that he says he briefed the Senate "Gang of 8" and not one questioned the need for, much less objected to, opening an FBI investigation into the President of the United States.
means and methods.
...as would any patriotic American.
(no message)
(no message)
Her conspiracy controller must have been so pissed.
Asking one question like that is pretty tough for the MSM, which has just assumed we have an answer, like you and Jim have assumed. But, these are questions that should have been asked before now. I wonder if she thought it was a softball question, and yet, his only answer was that Trump didn't want his administration investigated. Yeah...that sounds like enough to remove the president from office. I'm thinking we should have a higher standard than TDS among some in power.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
As Chris points out this investigation was discussed with the Senate leaders and no one objected.
How much evidence would you say they needed to BEGIN an investigation into something this important? I would like to know your standard so we can apply it to investigations into the other side as well.
If you want consistency, then you will support the Right being able to pay to create a dossier and then use it as a basis to investigate/spy on the Democrat nominee's campaign (including using it as the basis for rubber stamped warrants). There's consistency for you. Enjoy. This country is going down the crapper, but that is the only way to be fair at this point.
Seriously, what is your standard? Or should all of this just be ignored unless there is video tape, proof beyond a reasonable doubt? What the Russians did in 2016 and the many contacts between the campaign and them clearly established cause to look into it. Or would you just have ignored all that like you tried to in the beginning claiming there wasn’t enough evidence that the Russians did interfere?
One last thing. I would say the same fucking thing if it had been Hills doing it and she got elected.
Stop the conservative martyrdom syndrome. You sound like Hills and Slick whining about the vast right wing conspiracy.
You are conflating "interference" (which the Russians have always done) with "Trump was a Russian operative." A common tactic in the early stages of all of this: Pretend denying collusion is the same as not wanting to investigate Russian interference. Trump called for investigations of the Russians. Why would any Trump supporter oppose that?
I just want a consistent standard. Trump gets to do everything being done to him. I assume you are ok with that?
You think every thing McCabe and Co. did was great? OK. Then let Trump's FBI do the same thing.
(no message)
(no message)
I also know there is one when you questioned Mueller relying on Crowdstrike for the conclusion that the hack was from Russia and from the outside. I think I can’t find it because Baron started the thread and because I have him ignored the thread won’t come up.
But you repeatedly questioned whether Russia was behind the hack.
Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=486866
I have no problem with yer standard because nothing wrong was done to Trump. As usual the defenders of the accused always complain about the process. A page right out of the OJ playbook.
And just to prove how utterly full of shit you are, Orange as late as the Helsinki summit said he believed Putin that they didn’t interfere. He in no way wanted that investigated.
Like Trump, I supported investigation of interference.
given to wiki leaks. I can find more if you need them.
Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=308487
(no message)