Reminder: McCabe has been referred for possible criminal prosecution. If he's prosecuted, decent change McCabe points to stuff like this and successfully argues improper influence on case.https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1028269087133257728 …
-
-
Yep, I only focused on the investigation designed to remove the President from office and his constant calls to expose corruption under previous administration.
-
Unprecedented efforts have also been focused on what Trump claims is corruption, and yet no evidence of corruption has been shown. Perhaps, maybe, Trump made that up?
-
The other way - zero evidence of collusion, lot's of evidence of corruption under Obama's DOJ in Clinton and Trump investigations. Yet he can't get his own DOJ to shut down Mueller or provide unreducted Docs to Congress.
-
Oh, he has (or had, at one time), a way to shut down Mueller. He knows if he does it will accelerate impeachment. But thanks for telling me there's no evidence of "collusion" so I can dismiss you as a flat-earther.
-
OK, so we agree - he has as much influence to shut down Mueller as he does to have any impact on the McCabe investigation. Which was my original point. As to me being a flat-earther, I think I got that designation with my deplorable certificate, no?
-
Say. Did you notice McCabe got fired. You keep pointing to facts that prove my case, and prove you're just repeating propaganda.
-
Are you arguing that Trump can fire whomever he wants in his Administration (McCabe) or that he can't (Mueller/RR/Sessions)? I'm somewhat confused.
-
"Can" is a word that refers to legal authority. Yes, he can -- and obviously did, with McCabe. Can with impunity is a political term. Because the evidence he conspired with Russia is so damning, no he can't, bc it will only accelerate attention to that conspiracy.
- 2 more replies
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.