Steve CoxKonto zweryfikowane

I do. Currently, the IC is pushing to reignite the Cold War because they know we’re tired of the War on Terror. They need a new enemy to justify their incredible budgets. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/06/trump-putin-and-the-new-cold-war/amp …

So, do you think all of these indictments are a sham? Do you dismiss the IC assessment of Russian election interference on Trump's behalf? Was Don Jr's mtg w/Russian agents really about adoptions? Is Trump's refusal to enforce sanctions just a policy judgment?

We have seen absolutely ZERO independently verifiable evidence of Russian interference for Trump. Zero. And none of the indictments so far have involved Russian election interference, either. Once you realize that, the rest comes into focus.

LOL, dude it's right there in the headline. https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/16/politics/mueller-russia-indictments-election-interference/index.html …

Read the story. He inducted 13 supposed members of a private company, none of whom are even in the US. It’s a political indictment. Posturing. And even if it’s *all* true, they didn’t move any numbers. Hillary spent over a billion dollars - 3x as much as Trump - and lost.

Right. "None of the indictments so far have involved Russian election interference." "Oh, they have? Well, those indictments were just POLITICAL indictments". WTF does that even mean? You are dismissing every fact that doesn't align with your preferred narrative.

I was talking about the people close to Trump like Manafort. They can indict unknown people in a foreign land all day long. It’s meaningless. Do you believe “WMDs in Iraq” was a mistake? Or a lie?

Manafort is being squeezed on his other dealings to get him to talk about Russia. He was at the Don Jr mtg, too. And he was instrumental in having the GOP platform 180 on Ukraine. We will likely learn more. You are making conclusion about an investigation that is far from over.