By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
barneystinson69 said:
Zkuq said:

There's no proof because he just fired the guy leading the investigation in whether he collaborated with the Russians. How can it be that hard to see? Now I'm not saying there could have been, or will be, any proof, or that he did collaborate with Russia, but if he did, this sure is a good move to hide it. He's brought this on himself, collaboration with Russia or not.

His days were numbered either way, especially with how he handled the email thing. And investigations have already been put into Russian collaboration since the election - nothing has shown a direct connection with Trump so far. Its been 7 months, yet nothing has come up. Its a story that the leftist media has been dragging on because they want to find something to destroy his presidency, but the simple fact is that the Russian's did not "rig" the election...

You do realize these types of investigations can take years to complete, right? This isn't a crime show where the evidence and data comes all together in 60 minutes... Hypothetically they might find all the evidence post Trump-era. Whether or not he did or did not is not what I am arguing here though. What I am, is telling you investigations aren't solved overnight. This is the same fallacy as the "how can global warming be real if it snowed in December?" deal. They arent super duper fast. They need to be precise. Especially with massive accusations such as this one.