Again, reading his tweets, he specifically cites ads. Hence the points I made in my story. You wrote “Goldman was addressing all of IRA’s activity on Facebook.” I just don’t understand how you came to that conclusion.
-
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.