Short thread: I must confess that I’m completely puzzled by the argument that it’s somehow a _defense_ of Trump to point to the Hillary campaign’s employment of an ex-intel officer who used foreign sources. 1/
The 2016 race was snake v. snake. That’s one reason why millions upon millions of Americans voted in anguish. For defenders of one candidate to point to constantly point to the behavior of the other is a justification for a vote, not an excuse for misconduct /2
Hillary should have been indicted and prosecuted for mishandling classified information. I’ve never seen or read a convincing argument excusing her behavior. Never. /3
I have grave concerns about the way in which her team used foreign sources to gather “oppo” on Trump and have never heard a convincing argument that she and her team weren’t just as vulnerable to manipulation as Trump and his team. /4
But none of the above — none — justifies “taking the meeting” with admitted and avowed Russian operatives. None of the above — none — justifies the avalanche of lies covering up Russian contacts or the hiring of corrupt men on the Kremlin payroll /5
And perhaps — just perhaps — one of the reasons for the obsession about Trump/Russia compared to lesser concern for Clinton/Fusion GPS is that Donald Trump is actual POTUS and Clinton is not /6
Let’s make a deal: Let’s investigate all of it, and if Trump colluded, let’s introduce articles of impeachment.
If Hillary colluded, let’s make her step down from whatever she leads now — the Chappaqua Hiking Trails association, perhaps?
Deal? /end
If Hillary colluded, let’s make her step down from whatever she leads now — the Chappaqua Hiking Trails association, perhaps?
Deal? /end
