@hightor,
hightor wrote:
[1] If they actually have the memo they don't need to print it; it's perfectly unacceptable for them to quote it.
[2]No, you guys can't seem to get this — when a charge is made or a story is reported that's "news".
[3]How do you know there isn't? Are you part of the investigation or something and know what information and material they have in their possession?
[1] You probably meant to say "acceptable," eh? Thing is, they DON'T have it, and have said so. Some guy (God only knows who) read some **** to them over the phone, that's all.
[2]You'll never learn, willya? Ya done been schooled on this. It is not "news" if someone starts and unsubstantiated rumor. No respectable paper will "report" any old trash that comes their way. That's why nobody (except buzzfeed) would publish the Trump "dossier." Even the disreputable rags, like Wapo, wouldn't touch that one.
[3] Where ya been the last year? This has been investigated by a "joint team" involving the FBI, CIA, and the NSA, who were told by Brennan to "focus exclusively" on the matter, for about that long, and congress has been fully briefed on the results.
Yet every congressman (and there are many) who has spoken on the topic, including Maxine Waters and Diane Feinstein, have said they have seen NO evidence of "collusion." So, no, we don't know something they don't. We simply know what they do know, because they've told us. Your fallacious "argument from ignorance" aint makin it, pal.
Nice try, cheese-eater.