@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:False. You don't know hde had nothing to do with ity. You HOPE he had nothing to do with it, that's all. There is no way you can KNOW it, because you have no knowledge of what went on behind the scenes.
It is abundantly clear that he had nothing to do about it. By virtue of having my eyes open I can see that Trump had nothing to do with it. (Not to mention the fact that if he had been involved, his involvement would be entirely lawful.)
MontereyJack wrote:If there's prosecution it won't be abusive, but fact= and evidence=driven,
Wrong. Special prosecutors have a history of abusing prosecutorial discretion. That is why the Democrats always demand that one be appointed. Democrats always want to abusively prosecute innocent people.
MontereyJack wrote:and his associates have a whole lot of questionable actions to explain.
Since nothing that they are being accused of is even illegal, there is nothing for them to explain. You don't have to explain yourself when you are doing something that is perfectly legal.
Further, if the Democrats had wanted this to be sorted out and explained, they wouldn't have demanded a special prosecutor. They would have demanded an independent commission. A special prosecutor is not going to sort out and explain anything. All a special prosecutor is going to do is abuse prosecutorial discretion and try to convict innocent people.
MontereyJack wrote:Again, as usual, you mistake your desires for facts.
No mistakes on my end. Everything I said is factual.