Because there never was any reasonable suspicion of Trump collusion with Russia. They took a Hillary campaign slogan and turned it into wiretapping her presidential opponent. Illegality with a legal false front.
So...I like that...but...do we have access to the pleadings (or whatever it is that they are called in that “court”)? Do we know for a fact that no evidence was given (or crappy evidence?)?
How can the Dems not say, “well, the court independently and fairly ruled that there WAS evidence enough”?
(Perhaps an angle is that regardless, the crime on the D side is sharing with hilary’s campaign....that could obviously be a problem....)
#2 like she did when her and obama had that guy arrested for a youtube video after Benghazi.
How many people had internet service in Libya?
How many would know about a video at youtube out of literally a billion videos?