Quote:
Originally Posted by mooby
True, hence why he was removed from his job and demoted. And fortunately for you, he wasn't in a position to decide whether or not to bring charges anyways. So if all he brought to the table was corrupt bullshit, you are saying you don't have faith in Mueller that he could correctly decide whether that evidence would be admissible in court. Nor do you have faith that a pro-Republican Congress could look at that same evidence and determine whether it's admissible or not. This case is not going to built on his testimony. I bet Flynn will be the star witness, most likely along intercepts from Russia and other circumstantial bits and pieces used to tie it together.
|
I said before, if a majority Republican house sees the evidence and votes to impeach, or if the Supreme Court upholds the removal from office, I will abide by that.
But it's interesting, how many cases Baltimore just threw out on the basis of fake evidence by biased cops. The question is could a clearly biased investigator either by omitting evidence that clears or allowing patently false evidence (Steele Dossier) into the record, sway a case to a false end?
I think so...