3 ms·
Much of that evidence had been disproven (and not in the "You can't prove a negative" sense, but in the "People and actions were quoted that refuted the accusat
by GauntletWizard 5y ago
Much of that evidence had been disproven (and not in the "You can't prove a negative" sense, but in the "People and actions were quoted that refuted the accusations and were impossible according to other evidence"), rendering the rest of that dossier's accusations suspect/discredited. Plenty of true things were in the dossier, but none of them were incriminating, except in as much as Trump has open hands and poor taste in business partners.
- throwawaylinux 5y agoThey already knew the dossier was flimsy and had problematic provenance, didn't they? There seems like no way that could possibly have been the only evidence used to justify the warrants, or to keep a special council investigation running for 2 years, or have Adam Schiff as ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee clearly state that he had seen ample evidence that Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election. Surely there must be much stronger evidence out there. The simplest explanation says that Putin and Trump got to Mueller and Schiff and others to keep them quiet and prevent the evidence getting out. What's the alternative?
- GauntletWizard 5y agoThe alternative is that Obama and Biden, or anyone in their bureaucracy, got to the FBI and convinced them to accept their crazy dossier. This is entirely he said she said, without the records of the court in question - and even then would likely be he said she said.
- throwawaylinux 5y agoA very far fetched conspiracy theory that would really have astounding implications for the entire system of government inthe country. What's more likely happened is Putin and/or Trump got to Mueller and Schiff and others to silence them and bury all the evidence.