Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
not fair. We all did, at least once.
|
I didn't. I was never here. In fact, it is the tendency of people like Sebastian to speak with absolute certainty about issues that they does not have knowledge about that prevented me from ever stepping foot into this fetid cesspool of a so-called political debate in the first place.
Actual question for Sebastian. Putting aside that basically everything you said in your post is complete nonsense (e.g., you don't actually know whether or not collusion existed, you have zero information about what Manafort actually said to the Russians, your speculation about whether Trump was sophisticated enough to have engaged in illicit agreements with the Russians is entirely pulled from your ass, and your predictions about what voters do and do not care about have proven astoundingly unreliable in the past), let's just acknowledge that neither you nor I nor anyone else here knows what was said to Russia during the campaign and whether or not there was any influence on the campaign. But if you were a betting man, and you were forced to wager $100,000 on whether or not Trump or his campaign team had communications with Russia about influencing the election or about whether Russia had compromising information on Trump, and assuming you were going to get a definitive answer tomorrow, based solely on the fact that the administration seems desperate to distract from or otherwise subvert any investigation into these communications, wouldn't you put your money on "Yes"?
