I have that same question. It seems highly suspect and totally un-FBI-like. Why would the FBI take the word of someone they're investigating and the analysis of a third party rather than confiscate the computers and run their own investigation of them? Believe me, if those computers belonged to you or me, they would have hauled them off to an FBI lab.
At any rate...
This is a stupid and yet consistent Trump tactic to get a lie into the public arena: "That's what I heard." From the voices in his head, no doubt. It's a lie he's selling, and it's a lie that he heard it. Two lies in one.The AP’s Julie Pace asked whether [Trump] meant Crowdstrike, the firm that detailed Russia’s involvement in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee. “That’s what I heard,” Trump said. “I heard it’s owned by a very rich Ukrainian, that’s what I heard.” This is not true.
WaPo
Yes, it's obvious. Trump wants only to do what's right for the American people. And, by the way, want to buy a bridge?Speaking to NBC’s Lester Holt shortly after the firing of Comey, Trump [...] said that he was worried about lengthening the investigation by firing Comey, but that he had to “do the right thing for the American people.”
They indeed must be laughing at the US. Hysterically and in terror. Just like we are.When not explaining the firing of Comey to a reporter on national television, though, there’s no indication that Trump’s efforts to “get to the bottom” of the hacking involved any actual interest in the investigation.
At the end of May, Trump offered his most recent opinion on the alleged interference.
Russian officials must be laughing at the U.S. & how a lame excuse for why the Dems lost the election has taken over the Fake News. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 30, 2017
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment