>>5846693
>>5846675
No you insult because that's how you get people to agree with you.
Oldest Intel trick in the book.
Bully.
If you don't have the facts or reasoning;
insult, bully, bully again. Round up your sock puppets, play the victim [even], cry "shill"
We know the routine.
As I said, if you had the evidence [not a claim to secret evidence ] you would show it and argue your case.
If you truly believed it and had no evidence you would just write "Wait and see"
No you are grinding an ax.
And I figured out why.
It's all clear now.
Future shines the light on the past.
Because this very stupid rumor has been around for years. With no grounds; just like the Mueller "investigation"
We'll see.
But I'm citing Nunes as my proof
Last night "Bad Cops"
That's all they are.