So, no. He didn't make any comments about the structure of the investigation and you're back to misreading grammar? Again, I've got real dates of real events of real investigations that Andy and you claim were always under Mueller and you've got ... a problem with grammar.
-
-
You have yet to show me a single thing that is inconsistent with my understanding of this, and I've showed you that in fact the press has reported this.
-
No, now I understand your point I dont have anything to dispute it. I can show you 95% of press reporting which do not show what you have. So i dont agree thats its just Andy and I. My bet would be 90% of public believe Mueller was investigating ALL Russia meddling not just Trump
-
I've not seen anything like that (except the Lawfare thing, which I linked in my post). I have seen the Reuters and WSJ and WaPo reports that I linked that support my point (tho no one has noted some details I have).
-
I do now understand Andy's point, which has always been erroneous about the CI status of this investigation. From the start there was a criminal nexus. But I only just realized he misunderstood scope.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There are a lot of false assumptions floating around as fact in the public conversation surrounding the Mueller probe. Some are due to bad faith actors like Giuliani trying to muddy the waters, some just a misreading of the nuance surrounding the initial appointment.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.