>>>No. But off the top of my head - short list:
>
>Your short list is basically a list of every possible allegation without even an attempt to provide evidence.

I'm not going to sit here and go though all this crap - you can figure some of out on your own. But you're being foolish. For example he violated Wisconsin election laws by talking with voters as they stood in line to vote. If he's there doing that with a pile of video's showing it happen - like WTF kind of evidence are you looking for dude? geeeze wake up.

>The epectation seems to be that throwing mud results in investigations and eventually some will stick.
>
>That's corrupt.
>
>>>Senate Intelligence Committee, House Intelligence Committee, Senate Judiciary Committee, House Judiciary Committee, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee , Justice Department, FBI, etc etc etc they all have invesitgations going on in one form or another about Trump (and/or Trump officials) and Russia. Dude there is too much for me to list here, you'll just have to look it all up. There are quite a few different targets (although they all end up back to Trump of course) and naturally some are going to overlap.
>
>Yes, but neither you nor it seems they can identify a statute he's alleged to have breached. That's my point. You do know the definition of a witch hunt, don't you?
>
>JR>>Do you have any specific statutes that TRUMP is supposed to have breached to explain your diatribes against him?
>VA>>See the above short-list
>
>I think this is the disconnect: an impressively long list of unsubstantiated allegations is not a list of breached statutes. It's all cowboy hat but no cattle.