This is from 2016.
Furthermore, I think its quite absurd that you would accused me of "chang[ing] words". Obviously I didn't directly quote you, but my recant of your original statement is essentially the same. Its quite telling to see you complain because I didn't directly quote you.
Obviously I didn't directly quote you
What I mean is that you rephrase things to slant them to fit your perspective, which indicates that you will do the same when reading/listening to others.
And if you think I'm complaining, that's just another example of you doing it.
Is hillary going to jail? Are we on Trump's time schedule?
This is from 2016.
If you believe that Trump has a plan and is still following it (and is still in control and using the Insurrection Act to operate as a legitimate shadow government during a time of irregular warfare), then you might understand that he had no intention of going after Hilary during his first Administration. But that doesn't mean he won't when he comes back into the light as the real POTUS when the time is right.
He's very careful with his words and uses them for creating the optics that leads his enemies to respond the way he wants them to, which in this case helps to make Hilary feel no need to act out against him as she would if he had said otherwise. This gave him the opportunity to follow through with other parts of his plan uninterrupted, while maintaining the appearance of weakness that has helped him carry out that plan while avoiding the worst consequences that might result if he went about it any other way than he has.
You need to put yourself back to 2016 and what we didn't know then (but he did) and then look at what we've learned since then about what the DS were planning and what would have resulted if Trump had appeared too much of a threat.
(post is archived)