. . . while Mueller didn't find collusion....
....But perhaps you can show me where either of the CIA directors chosen by Trump (Pompeo or Haspel) has denied the conclusion reached by CIA (before Obama left office)....
....If those evil "deep state" plotters everyone blathers on about (like the FBI love birds) had wanted to keep Trump from winning, then why didn't they simply leak the existence of the investigation?....
I appreciate the time you offered to walk through these thoughts. They are insightful, but are you concluding that there was intent to collude?
I think we can say that what you commented about Mueller is true. Instead of speculation about his finding, wouldn't a special counsel related question be why in this case did he make that politically charged televised report and extrapolate with opinion not in his report? Who knows, maybe he'll share when he testifies, or maybe we'll see future counsels that take the political ball and run with it instead of dabble around the edges.
Is it productive to speculate about what an agency fails to deny? Did you uncover facts that're being ignored by right wing conspiracy theorists? The one thing that we can both see in plain sight, is that the CIA director from the last administration lost his security clearance. Was that political retaliation from the top, or did the agency have to make a decision based on improper use if the information? Who knows, but his televised track record of statements has taken a distinct backtracking trend in recent months.
Why did you characterize a couple of folks as love birds? Doesn't that conflict with your 'how it really is' approach? All we really know is that they were relieved from the highest level of duty for reasons not related to their private lives, right? Did the acting director get relieved from duty purely for politics, even McCabe has been tap dancing in recent months on tv instead of maintain professional standards. And, wouldn't you say it's misleading to speculate on non leaking, when the relieved director himself volunteered that he leaked information to an unauthorized friend to ensure a special counsel would be appointed? Why isn't that a juicier area to speculate about?
You mentioned Page and FISA being rock solid. Do we know that or are we speculating about that? Maybe, maybe not, but aren't the facts that we might learn more about FISA abuses in the upcoming Horowitz report? I think a key point about this 'discussion' is that just because nca likes to repeat things, doesn't logically follow on that they are true, right?
