4 thoughts on “Clinton-Libya And Trump-Russia”

  1. I’ve always seen two problems with the Russia Collusion investigation.

    The first is the idea that Russia had any significant impact on the election regardless of whom they colluded. No evidence has been produced to show significant impact and key people from all sides of the argument have clearly stated a lack of significant impact. That doesn’t necessarily mean no crime was committed, but it does mean the turmoil caused by the investigation and its length of time was never justified by a crime.

    The second issue is that if it is a crime to collude with a foreign entity, then all aspects should be investigated. After all, it was clear from the start that the claim of Russian collusion came from a collision between Clinton and the UK. Whatever the US relation with the UK today; I’m certain we fought a war or two to permanently banish the UK from influencing our elections.

    The FBI would have credibility today if they investigated collusion in the election rather than operating the overt coup to overthrow Trump.

    As for Clinton and Libya, why stop there. There is Clinton and Ukraine, Clinton and China, and one wonders how much the Clinton’s are making in Latin America. Her strength as SecState was due to her corrupt involvement in so many foreign governments.

    1. Even sticking to just the issue of Russia, how could the SC ignore that the DNC, Hillary campaign, and the DOJ were all working with Russian agents? “Outside their purview.” Is a terrible excuse when the country deserves answers into what actually transpired.

      Notice that when independent investigators got the initial data from FB and Twitter, they said it showed Russia pumping every issue of the right and the left and they weren’t supporting Trump. Then access got shut down and no more data was available. Clapper and Brennan said they had evidence it was all to help Trump but the actual evidence showed otherwise.

  2. To me it looks like Russia simply tried to grease the palms of both candidates. Much like some corporations do.

Comments are closed.