Quote:
Originally Posted by HedonistForever
It will of course be met with a yawn from Democrats who couldn't case less if the entire top echelon of the FBI, DOJ and CIA were indicted. It will be fair minded Independents that will look at the evidence and judge whether there is anything to what Barr is saying. It has been my belief from the very beginning and I think the evidence will show that a conspiracy at the highest level of the agencies mentioned actually happened all with Obama's blessing .
The Obama people were so afraid of what Trump would do to their "legacy" that they decided that he could not be the nominee and as a whole, worked to keep him from the nomination. When he won, then they kicked it into overdrive to remove him from the Presidency. I believe the evidence will clearly show this but I agree that the Democrats simply will not care any more than they cared when presented with the evidence that the FBI changed documents to make sure they could get an investigation going in the FISA court.
Some footnotes have just been released suggesting that exculpatory evidence from Papadopolous was left out of the evidence presented to the FISA court.
What I have been trying to figure out but with little luck, is what the hell Horowitz based his opinion, that even though he saw the evidence of fraud by the FBI, he said he thought they still had a predicate for the opening of an investigation. If it wasn't Carter Page and the evidence suggests it wasn't and it wasn't Papadopolous and a 14 day sentence suggests it wasn't and not one single American much less anybody in the Trump campaign was ever indicted for conspiracy to interfere in the election, what the hell did Horowitz see that justified the investigation? Anybody?
|
Horowitz did the Comey shuffle. You know. When he listed all of Hillary’s crimes but said he couldn’t show intent. So no indictment. The swamp has each others backs.
