Michael's basic argument is that unless the maximalist argument (i.e. Steve Bannon execute for treason, a la Louise Mensch) is proven, then there's nothing of value in the Mueller investigation. That's pretty obviously not the case.https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1113533994644250624 …
-
-
So every criminal investigation that concludes there's insufficient proof of guilt is worthless from the start? That's an interesting standard...
-
There was no discernible crime being investigated. The FBI investigation was launched on false pretenses. It was predicated on a fraud.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
You should go on Tucker Carlson’s show and explain this
-
Have already done so, and happy to do it again. Would also be happy to do it on MSNBC or CNN but unfortunately they're too commercially invested in peddling the fraud.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That is a grotesque approach to law enforcement, and also not what the word “fraud” means.
-
Yeah, I was going to point out that Tracey has no idea what the word “fraud” means, but you beat me to it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Is every investigation that shows the suspicion that launched the investigation was ultimately unfounded fraudulent? Because that's what you're saying and it's very stupid and you should say that on white power tv.
-
Yup. That’s exactly what’s being said.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Michael, no snark, I am trying to understand this. How can a conspiracy (or any crime) be proven or disproven without an investigation?
-
there's nothing to understand. it's an evasion
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The fire department investigated the billowing clouds of smoke and found no blazing inferno. Therefore, their investigation was a complete waste of time.
-
It’s more like the fire dept investigated the clouds of smoke and found no blazing inferno but still found 34 cats stuck in trees.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That’s why police never launch investigations without a conviction first.
-
Perfectly said.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I love how the conspiracy you do believe, that there's a deep state conspiracy out to paint Donald Trump as a corrupt fraud is, in your mind, the logical one here.
-
Reminds me of one of my favorite cartoons of the era.pic.twitter.com/5Aq2h9utza
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Michael can we see your tax returns this year lol jesus man
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is like saying that if you investigate a purported murder and do not find sufficient evidence to prove that a murder was committed but do find evidence on grand theft, extortion and drug running, the investigation was still a fraud.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@joshtpm If every investigation not finding the wrongdoing it investigates means that the investigation is fraudulent, then the only legitimate investigations are those leading to charges. But how can an investigation know in advance what's going to find? -
In fact, the only legitimate investigations =and not the ones run by goons in authoritarian regimes- are precisely those which don't know with what result they are going to come up with.
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.
