I’m not debunking your claims about McCabe, I’m saying they are irrelevant to my point.
Um, no it isn't.
So that we don’t divert down a pointless path Iets assume your right about McCabe and he was out to get Trump. Fine, but he is not controlling anything at this point and he hasn’t for a while.
So, because he's not there anymore his crimes don't matter?
Trump appointed people have been steering the ship and they all stand behind the investigations validity.
I already addressed that but here you are again, hammering away on it redundantly. It's your only argument and it's an empty one.
Also to save the diversion let’s assume Rosenstein was in on it, as silly as that claim is after his role in firing Comey.
Silly? After refusing to hand over subpoenaed documents it's silly? And he recommended firing Comey so he would have an excuse to appoint Mueller. And aren't you forgetting about his offer to wear a wire to a Trump meeting to try to catch him in a lie? Silly?
Whittaker who was appointed by Trump and was a vocal opponent of the mueller investigation. And now Barr who was a Bush guy who was appointed by Trump.
Whitaker's appointment was temporary until the position was filled and Barr was just recently confirmed. Don't you think it's a little early to draw a conclusion about him?
None of these three guys have any reason to conspire in a coup or hoax investigation.
Really? So McCabe is admitting to his part in a coup attempt and implicating Rosenstein because they had no reason to conspire in a coup or hoax investigation? That's your idea of "debunking"? I think you're the one who is done here.