Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 66,372
- 16,802
- 2,190
Well then it should be easy for you. Right now you are conflating to unassociated situations. The Uranium One deal and the Dossier. You are getting the latest talking points mixed up in your head. One was a deal made between the US and the Russians, apparently made to grease the wheels for the Iran deal. The second was opposition research funded by a political campaign.They were all colluding with the Russians to do what? Are you really claiming that the FBI investigation, which was going on long before the dossier, was impacted by the content of the dossier alone with no other corroborating evidence? You don't see how ridiculous that claim is?As it turns out? How exactly does it turn out that way? And please don't point to that second paragraph which is completely full of misinformation. Do some research before you try and make points like that, you just sound confused.As it turns out, there was a political party that was colluding with the Russians leading up to the 2016 Election; it wasn't Trump, it was Mueller, Comey, Hillary and the entire Democrat Party.
Does using the proceeds from the Uranium One transaction, where Hillary extorted $145,000,000, a titanic amount, maybe the biggest bribe ever paid, in order to procure the faked wee weed up dossier now make the entire Democrat Establishment and St Hillary radioactive (did you follow that?)
Thats pretty much what was happening. Clintons, mueller, comey, dnc were all colluding with the russians while buying fake dossiers and then passing them off to a corrupt fbi in comey.
No, it goes back to the uranium, foundation etc. The fake dossier was just periphery junk the clintons were hoping to advance to obfuscate. It doesnt take einstein to surmise what really happened.
You still haven't explained what these people were colluding with the Russians about. Care to explain that one?