So with “high confidence” in collusion, but “no evidence”, are we to infer that 5:5, eventually, will be who it is that sets the DNC’s sorry case to rest permanently?
The JD fraudulent players and the DNC’s habitual lies and taken together are easily turned into law suits, based on thin air and flaming slander of a president.
If it is the 5:5 and Snowden who can lend us some closed case truth, then they need to sweep in and get it done.
Lest we forget the coming blood bath we’re all going to take possibly in the Mid-terms.
(*Remember to please excuse that genetically, I’m the glass-half-empty type.)
No, because that five eyes stuff is state secret as is NSA and the fact that it has everything.
The burden is on the plaintiff to make his case, not on defendant to disprove it. All Trump has to do is "deny deny deny." Still, part of the preocess is discovery going both ways, and th eother side has to cooperate or suffer adverse inference on everything they stonewall. DNC is holding much damaging info on itself.
-- [half-empty glass] Lest we forget the coming blood bath we're all going to take possibly in the Mid-terms. --
Long way to November, and don't believe the conventional wisdom. As always, the elections come down to lesser of two evils. Elect DEMs, and Trump will be impeached and removed from office. Plus the government will try to take your guns. Simple facts of modern politics in the USA.
Just got another thought on “5:5”. Ratio arithmetic is difficult at first. You must train your brain to think “parts of a whole”. From ratio you can advance to fractions (yeah, I know, 3rd grade stuff). So...
Prior to the inauguration of Donaldus Maximus, who were the _5_ highest ranking officials that should not have known about the surveillance but actually did?
Do the White Hats have the ability to bring down all 5 parts of “the whole” (5:5, a ratio)?
We can start with Obama and Clinton...who else? McCain might be on that list. Schiff?