For example, dossier Source A is described as 'senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure.' 2/6
-
-
Show this thread
-
Dossier Source B is described as 'former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin.' 3/6
Show this thread -
Dossier Source C is 'senior Russian financial official.' 4/6
Show this thread -
None of that means Russia wasn't conducting big effort to interfere in US election. By all accounts, it was… 5/6
Show this thread -
Just means Russian campaign was more complex than the hurt-Hillary-help-Trump effort some want you to believe. 6/6
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
was treason for Trump campaign to talk to
#Russian now its merely opposition research for Dems#CrookedHillary -
Funny (not) how that works, isn't it?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Crowdstrike,GPSFusion,Christopher Steele,all involved in those companies,their ties to DNC,Hillary,Obama Admin,Russia.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
It would be great if people would do some research. So sick of Democrat talking points pushed down our throats ad nauseam by complicit media
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Question: if uranium thing is true, why would Russians want to help Trump beat Hillary? Wouldn't they want her to win?
-
Their goal was to damage both candidates in order to weaken our country no matter who won. They like everyone else thought Hillary would win
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Well trump didn't sign over 20% of uranium
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
2. Absolutely no evidence found of collusion by Trump. All a farce. Rest of dossier,reads like a playbook by Democrats.Obvious.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
1. Carter Page says he will be vindicated,all came forth voluntarily. Feinstein,Pelosi,ALL of them have said there has been NO evidence
-
Carter Page said he'll take the 5th. So his testimony may incriminate him? You know that's the opposite of "vindicate," right?
-
If that's the case why is it when Dem's wanted him to testify & he was willing, that they dropped it?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
And why wouldn't they?They knew fr.
#UraniumOne,@HillaryClinton could be bought by donations 2@ClintonFdn &exaggerated speaking fees 2 BillThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Didn't care for Hillary at all. None of this changes the fact that we have a embicile in the WH thanks to Russia.
-
Thanks to Russia? Lol. That’s a joke. He’s in there bc the DNC rigged the Primary for a narcissistic compulsive corrupt political criminal
-
Probably would have. Though Bernie’s Econ-policy is terrifying to me. I realize good ppl can disagree on that. Political reform is needed
-
Until then, spinning our wheels. Term limits, better tracking of campaign dollars and sourcing, and addition of libertarian party inclusion
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.