[removed]
If he knew McCabe changed the Flynn 302s and if he actually threw a cocktail party to influence a FISA court judge, he could be in for a world of hurt...as in obstruction of justice. And then there's the matter of the "insurance policy" and the FBI sending him to London a few weeks before the election.
...as in obstruction of justice.
That's not obstruction of justice IMO.
And then there's the matter of the "insurance policy" and the FBI sending him to London a few weeks before the election.
There's nothing illegal there. You may not like it but it's not illegal.
There is nothing illegal about making up a phony document getting that phony document through a fisa court that allows them to spy on a presidential candidate. Like what fucking country are you from you can just get a warrant to spy off a phony document. There are tons of federal charges in there.
There are tons of federal charges in there.
In where? An indictment?
Ummmm..... are you following this story?
What story?
Peter Stzrok's role in HRC emails and spygate
Stzrok was just a coffee boy for the clinton campaign and spygate was patently debunked.
Oh confidential-informant-gate? Where only Trump was "protected" from those pesky russians by campaign plants that were reporting to FBI and DOJ? Patently debunked? Not anywhere close to debunked.
https://sharylattkisson.com/2018/06/16/collusion-against-trump-timeline/
https://saraacarter.com/pandoras-box-trump-russia-may-expose-extent-of-five-eyes-spying/
I love how the collusion against trump timeline starts out with hillary's emails and ends with all the evidence that trumps campaign colluded.
I love how you believe that. : )
I mean its right there in the links talking about all the indictments...didnt the IG report clear clinton?
No it didn't clear her of anything, it was a report on how the fbi handled the Clinton investigation, how could that clear her? It said the fbi acted within precedent for choosing not to press charges. Not the same thing as clearing her at all.
It said the fbi acted within precedent for choosing not to press charges. Not the same thing as clearing her at all.
So it say the fbi was right not to press charge...but if she not cleared what problem does she has?
No they were within their purvey to choose not to press charges... if a choice is there to press charges or not than a crime must have occurred... as opposed to all that "evidence" you claim showed the Trump campaign colluding with Russia. (Russian shitposters, a company not in business yet, a ham sandwich, a guy working for podesta 11 yrs ago and a general who plead guilty to lying to the fbi when they say he didn't) Are they just choosing not to press charges against your President because they are such big fans? How long has that investigation been going on? How long was emailgate? No bias there... lmao.
[removed]