Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
I just don’t get it. Never Trumpers have gone on and on and on about how Mueller was on to something, but just could not prove it. Mueller did not exonerate Trump, etc.
If Mueller was that and a bag of chips, and his crew were as pure a the driven snow, how on Earth can they justify the destruction of evidence? These people all managed to “accidentally” destroy evidence. Come on.
Maybe some of our legal experts in the community could weigh in on how the destruction of evidence is a crime.
I’d love to hear from the pro-Mueller crowd on this. Y’all have been so behind this man, and still think Trump colluded with Russia to fix the election, despite no strong evidence it happened. I dare you to explain how this sort of very strong evidence of malfeasance, this criminal activity by the team doing the investigation is OK and has no bearing at all on the investigation. Because my belief is that anyone investigator that destroys evidence is an investigator that is building a lie.
Change my mind.Published in