Steve CoxKonto zweryfikowane

You simply have no idea if that's true or not. We learn more every week about Russian interference, and we will continue to learn more via the Mueller probe. Again, you are jumping to preferred conclusions.

There’s no evidence to say otherwise, so my conclusion is evidentiary. Yours, on the other hand...

No, it's that neither of us are in a position to adopt a conclusion. I haven't yet, I don't know why you have, except that you really need to believe it for some reason. I have an open mind.

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/789573422716182529?s=20 …

No one was saying the American people were under any obligation to accept a fraudulently obtained victory. If it turns out that was the case, there should be hell to pay, not acceptance.

Uh huh... I’ll bet you $1000 that at the end of Mueller’s investigation there won’t be any independently verifiable evidence of Trump/Russia collusion. You in?

Sure, let's do it. But the standard for independently verifiable isn't whatever @RealSteveCox says it is. You already claimed once there had been no indictments regarding Russian meddling, when obviously that wasn't the case. If/when the evidence comes out, no moving goalposts.