If the IG report had found political bias against Trump you'd have championed it as Gospel.
Because it did not you complain it was not thorough.
Even though you were told here over and over it would be a nothing burger, you just went crazy with anticipation.
And then..... thud.
Go back and reread what I said, and then apply it contextually. No one is talking about Flynn and Manafort but you.
The point is, if the FBI is such a great investigative agency, and Trump was balls deep with the Russians, why didnt any of the texts and materials presented in the IG report indicate it?
Very peculiar. I brought this very thing up yesterday, and not a single one of you dared to approach it.
Remember Strzok/Page texts....
Oh, please, please tell me Trump wont win.. please.. right? Right?!
No, we will make sure of it, honey, but have supper ready and your panties around your ankles when I get home.
Smooches. Hugs. XOXO
GTFO, looter.
For example
Lutter wears Velcro shoes.
If Luther wears Velcro shoes then the statement is fact.
Luther is too stupid to tie shoes so he wears Velcro shoes.
Thats opinion based on the actions of Luther wearing Velcro shoes.
If I own a pair of Velcro shoes and the statement is, "Luther wears Velcro shoes", then that is an opinion based on the fact that I own a pair.
"Luther did not wear Velcro shoes today even though as we stated earlier (wrongly) Luther wears Velcro shoes." That is a fact; even though there is a false opinion embedded.
The fact that a person dislikes Trump does not mean that they are biased. That's an opinion.
Even if you're of the opinion that dislike constitutes bias, the fact is that the "bias" was not reflected in the investigation.
The fact may be that there was no bias to begin with, just extreme dislike.
This is a 100% true story: My wife's uncle gave me a pair of Velcro shoes that were owned by a friend of his who had recently died. We were visiting and he asked me what size of shoe I wore. When I told him, he said "I've got a practically brand new pair of shoes for you. You can have them, they're not my size." It's only after I took them that he told me they were from his dead friend.
I hated the shoes, never wore them, and took them to Goodwill a couple of months later.
If I own a pair of Velcro shoes and the statement is, "Luther wears Velcro shoes", then that is an opinion based on the fact that I own a pair.
"Luther did not wear Velcro shoes today even though as we stated earlier (wrongly) Luther wears Velcro shoes." That is a fact; even though there is a false opinion embedded.
The fact that a person dislikes Trump does not mean that they are biased. That's an opinion.
Even if you're of the opinion that dislike constitutes bias, the fact is that the "bias" was not reflected in the investigation.
The fact may be that there was no bias to begin with, just extreme dislike.
This is a 100% true story: My wife's uncle gave me a pair of Velcro shoes that were owned by a friend of his who had recently died. We were visiting and he asked me what size of shoe I wore. When I told him, he said "I've got a practically brand new pair of shoes for you. You can have them, they're not my size." It's only after I took them that he told me they were from his dead friend.
I hated the shoes, never wore them, and took them to Goodwill a couple of months later.
How can you twist two good deed to sound bad. He took the shoes out of respect and to not offend and then the gave them to the poor. Tell me what you would have done differently?
