Fair enough. It doesn't mean he's clean, either.
In this case, you have:
- refusal to provide financial transparency;
- Deutsche Bank making inexplicable loans to Biff after he bankrupted the same bank (bankers lending money to someone that previously bankrupted them), and now they're concerned he's backed by Russian money (if true, probably covering their own ass because they're in so much trouble as is)
- public request for Russia to steal data;
- now, lots of contacts between Biff's campaign and russian intelligence service;
- NSA screaming that he's compromised;
- One leak of a dossier that claims the russians have piss pics of Biff.
And we shouldn't investigate? I cant' understand why any sensible American wouldn't want to step back and take a look at this. Wrong team, I guess. That's what it's come to.
So lets look at this objectively and see which are facts:
1) He did refuse to release his taxes. That is a fact.
2) DB making inexplicable loans is in their business model. Unless there is evidence of impropriety, you are simply assuming a banks action. I can clearly attest that banks will loan to individuals who have filed bankruptcies with them previously, if they meet the right lending criteria. So this is assumption or flat false.
3) Public request for Russia to steal data: I have no idea how this narrative got to this level. Anyone who watched the rally where he said this would have to be Sheldon Cooper to not see the sarcasm dripping from his statement. This is a falsehood.
4) Lots of contact between Biff's campaign and Russian Intelligence: Maybe I've missed it in the noise...there's been lots of noise about nothing, but outside of Flynn, who spoke with any Russians prior to the election? If it was after the election, given the rhetoric of the sitting president, I would take the same stance of those conversations as Obama's: "After this election, I can be more flexible" comment. So true statement but exaggerated for effect (good Dem talking point though).
5) NSA screaming he's compromised: Anonymous sources. Always anonymous sources, that are quickly refuted by other intelligence agencies. False until some real evidence proves otherwise. We do still believe in the presumption of innocence in this country, right?
6) Dossier....this was so false and unprovable that the media wouldnt even touch it when it came out the first time around pre-election. Only after the election, when the media decided to go full-scale retard against Trump did this get 'leaked'. Again, completely unsubstantiated with many of the facts within the dossier proven to be inaccurate.
So based on my count, you have the tax story, which has been true for about a year now, and the Flynn story, which probably deserves an investigation. And I hope it gets just a thorough investigation as the IRS targeting scandal.
