Gonna have to call this projection, the psychological vomiting onto others the propaganda poisoning you've been eating, believing, and getting sick of yourself. How long will you ignore the fact that Leftenant Sanders was the people's candidate of choice but for the shenanigans of the High Felon campaign in collusion with the DNC, most obviously in the California primary, and made clear in the Seth Rich instigated Wikileak? As such, Sanders actually had a chance to win, given the narrow margins and we wouldn't be talking about whether Trump meant 'would' or 'wouldnt'. All Crony had to do was conduct a normal investigation into the use of a private server, come to a normal conclusion, and hand a hot potato to Lynch or the next in line after a Lynch recusal...and let justice take its course through DOJ and/or through public opinion. She should have been indicted. Ultimately justice did play out in public opinion, but instead of defaulting to Trump, the public was denied the opportunity to default to Sanders, who again, had a better chance of winning than the arrogant appointee from on high. All because of Crony''s meddling in collusion with tainted aristocrats and politicized intelligence beaurocrats. So shut the hell up about whether Russia would or wouldn't have been involved, as if they had more influence than Crony and his compatriots in collusion. If Sanders was president we wouldn't be talking about this. Meanwhile, I am not obliged to spit on Trump when you say spit on Trump. Personally, I thought the summit went well until Trump caved to media collusion, and changed would to wouldnt. It alarms me that he vascillates under political pressure. He should hammer the US "intelligence community" (whatever the hell that is) for its failure to prosecute the stealing of Sander's candidacy, and to safeguard the US political process from the shenanigans of a known felon. I'm not buying the would/wouldn't conflation and consider it a lie. But you wouldn't be quibbling about it had you given a damn about what happened to Leftenant Sanders. It's better than dealing with Shrillary Felon.
Well that is a start. 1. Trump is perceived as a unique threat and was before the election, not a tit-for-tat ordinary gripe. The left and if you remember nearly all the right voiced concerns about his past and potential for him being compromised by info/debts Russia and/or China have on him. The republicans only got behind Trump when it seemed however impossible, he was leading the primaries. 2. If Sanders had won, if Hillary had won there would be no.. bla bla. Ok We all see this often repeated point but think about this. What if one of the other Republican candidates had won? Say if Ted Cruz who came 2nd in the primaries had won the presidency what would we be doing now? Ted Cruz is president. Is there a similar inquiry into Russian election interference or not?
If I ate this kind of logic, I too would feel like vomiting on others. What happened to Leftenant Sanders (not to be confused with Colonel Sanders) is not reasonably conflatable with the legitimate race between Cruz and Trump. Apples to oranges. Unlike the DNC, the RNC got behind the candidate that was getting the most popular support, however impossible (unexpected) it may have seemed to them at the time. They were rewarded with a win for letting politics play out fairly. Not so for the DNC meddlers and their colluding compatriots in the dark corridors of the "intelligence community" (whatever the he'll that means). Those meddlers turned into the peddlers of the Trump-Russia propaganda (insinuations) that is currently turning the US into the land of the fools. You are simply ignoring just how serious and egregious was the effort to steal from Sanders. Now they are trying to steal from Trump. In either scenario they steal from the people, hoping that repeating the same theft will have a different result (in midterms and 2020). I predict a red wave will shove your insinuations up your ass...again.
Just answer the question man, always deflections. You know perfectly well that Cruz would have ordered an inquiry, they probably would have ex-candidate Trump in the stocks six months ago. Cruz was not going to leave 'always get revenge' Trump in the wind to start Trump Media and fuck him in four years. The DNC is a private organisation like the RNC. Until the president candidate is decided you can have as much effing court politics, back stabbing and general badness as you want. It is a gladiatorial fitness test. Underhanded is part of the deal. I think Sanders would have been a solid enough guy, as I grew up in Europe with is exactly what is was gunning for with an American twist I think it would have worked just fine for four years. Let us not forget that in a different totally dodgy move, Trump was shielded by the RNC brass by the 'Never Trumpers' voice vote in the RNC convention. The chair walked off stage, they actually won the voice vote clearly to people in the room but the RNC just said no, the opposite was the fact as they did not want Ted Cruz. https://deadline.com/2016/07/never-trump-shot-down-voice-vote-rnc-convention-1201788244/ Regardless this happened and Trump was also corruptly helped. And she won he primary and Trump survived the moral revolt against his reeking self. Up on till then, all is fair in war, it is the court politics of the two parties. In the future however since the US is irrevocably on a strong man politics path now... Next election there will be a very different tone, blackmail, threats and actual, not Infowars bullshit killings will be common place as it is in every DYING democracy sham. You don't want the strong man. Putin/Kim/Trump path, it leads to dictatorship EVERY TIME.