You are being disingenuous now. The tweet this referred to suggested that we created a story in order to write about it. That’s not what happened.
-
-
Look. Maybe start by fixing your laughable Hillary at the non-Hillary anti-Islamic protest claim, bc once you do that you'll see that's another piece of evidence you ignored that he's not talking about the indictment.
-
The reason the protests HE discusses (that you got laughably wrong) aren't in the indictment is bc they're probably not illegal under the theory Mueller used.
-
Here's a definition of the word "all," which you seem to have mis-read as "indictment." You'll see "indictment" is not listed as a synonym. Glad to be of help on basic reading.pic.twitter.com/EWX9LZMOBK
-
Here's a link you probably should have followed before doing a so-called "fact check." It's to a report on "all" the ads. https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2017/10/hard-questions-russian-ads-delivered-to-congress/ … Reminder: "all" is not a synonym for "indictment."
-
Here's another link you should have followed before doing a so-called "Fact check." It's to the story abt the protests you got laughably wrong. See all the Hillary ads? Oh, wait. No Hillary. https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2017/11/01/russian-trolls-organized-both-sides-of-an-islam-protest-in-texas …pic.twitter.com/6GvVs7plld
End of conversation
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.