>>..you're missing the whole point and splitting hairs - I suspect for no reason other than to start an argument because it's so clear.

I'm saying that if you want to build towers of grievance on assertions, you need to be able to validate the assertions that you proclaim to be bedrock. There's a repeating theme that you cannot. Or will not.

>> By calling it all a hoax and a witch hunt, going after investigators, firing he head of the FBI, etc etc etc, calling it all fake news, he is indeed attacking the investigation along with committing acts of obstruction of justice along the way

Simply repeating allegations that you can't substantiate is not a proof. Re Comey: the same people screaming for him to be fired over the timing of his investigation of HRC (timing now shown to be caused by McCabe sitting on the information) were suddenly aghast when Trump did fire him. Reality check: POTUS *can* fire the head of the FBI and unless you think Comey was conducting the investigation himself, It's a huge reach to call it obstruction- unless Manafort, Flynn or Papadopoulos or somebody else can credibly collaborate that Trump did it to obstruct the FBI. Maybe somebody can prove (rather than just allege) this, but for now your certainty is based on cult faith on which the whole narrative reiles, a small example of the fake news morass.

As for the tweet you quote: thanks for finally producing one, but you do realize a) it's not from Trump and b) it's an own goal, since it clearly calls the *Media* a witch hunt, not Mueller. Surely you see this:

>>July 27, 2017 "One of the things that has been lost in the politics of this situation is that the Russians collected and spread negative information.....
>>...about then candidate Trump." Catherine Herridge @FoxNews. So why doesn't Fake News report this? Witch Hunt! Purposely phony reporting.

>> and again this pee pee dossier is a tiny piece of the puzzle, and you keep pretending like it was used for the FISA warrants mentioned in the memo but the dossier came about long after the warrants..

Again, you insist it's a tiny piece of the puzzle as per the Vox narrative- but that requires that you ignore McCabe's evidence. Perhaps Schiff's essay will deny this too, in which case GOP pressure will go on to declassify so the public can see who's lying..
>>There is already a special counsel

Your problem is that Mueller's brief is to do with Russian (government) interference in the election, not abuse of power by FBI/DOJ . I don't agree that such abuse of power would be covered in Mueller's remit. More than happy to be shown wrong, though Rosenstein's letter is pretty short and specific.

>> and you need to stop watching infowars and thinking that there are secret agents involved in some deep state conspiracy ran by a second shadow government plotting against the USA lol.

We can probably save bytes on Michel's HD if I simply reply SM x (Straw man instance x) every time you do that. So today we're already up to SM 5.

My advice: watch who is calling to declassify or to allow sunlight as the best disinfectant, and who wants to put their own narrative out there while blocking release of anything that might contradict the narrative. The second one is the liar almost every time.