*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Poopadoop]

Shouldn't we first investigate the credibility of the person making the allegations. If they have an obvious reason to have a heavily biased perceptions of events....are their allegations credible??

When the former head of the FBI swears under oath about the president asking him to let his buddy (Flynn) off the hook, then I think no matter what you think of either Comey or Trump you should investigate it, yes.

[BananaStand]

When the former head of the FBI swears under oath about the president asking him to let his buddy (Flynn) off the hook, then I think no matter what you think of either Comey or Trump you should investigate it, yes.

That's just a legal magic trick. They can't get an obstruction charge without proving intent. And since intent can't be proven...that should be the end of the investigation. Instead, people like you have blue-pilled themselves to try and prove intent by showing that the Russia stuff is true.

[Poopadoop]

That's just a legal magic trick. They can't get an obstruction charge without proving intent. And since intent can't be proven...that should be the end of the investigation. Instead, people like you have blue-pilled themselves to try and prove intent by showing that the Russia stuff is true.

I'm not the one in charge of the investigation, so what I think has zero influence on how it all shakes out.

You should instead maybe be talking to your congressman if you feel the investigation is such a huge waste of taxpayers' money.