Misty » 18 May 2017 7:51 pm » wrote:
Where did I say there was anything illegal or anything about the alleged election thing?
It says right in the article that 'the people who described the contacts to Reuters said they had seen no evidence of wrongdoing or collusion between the campaign and Russia.'
I guess you don't understand that my sarcasm (which is what it was, hence the side eye smiley

) had to do with the fact that we seem to keep finding out that there are more and more undisclosed contacts with the Russians.
That is why I only posted the part of the article that dealt solely with that issue.
Why do you constantly try to ascribe some kind of nefarious motive to me?
Just Curious.....
1. While reading the article did it occur to you to question exactly why Rueters ha this information?
2. Did it occur to you to question who in the government leaked this?
2. Did it occur to you to think about the fact that the government is now leaking the contents of what they claim are legal conversations?