Also, I don't see the word "arrest" or "indict" in the article. What specific part of the article implies this to you?.
And please don't tell me I have to watch the video clip of John Podesta that's embedded in the page.
You certainly deserve kudos for painting such a rosy picture, and I hope you're right. You displayed excellent instincts and insight in the leadup to the election, and have continued to do so since.
I do remain somewhat skeptical regarding your "take" on AG Sessions, however, and the President's level of satisfaction with him, and I must confess to some lingering concerns of my own—concerns which you seem to dismiss outright.
Having said all that, I'm going to defer to your analysis for the time being, and join with you in remaining optimistic, albeit cautiously so...
No. Don’t watch the Pedo.
No, you don’t see arrest or indict in the article, just as in the first attacks on Trump you didn’t see “impeach.” The MO is to lay the ground work by denying she should even be investigated. Later will come the “She shouldn’t be indicted,” followed by “She shouldn’t be convicted,” followed by “She shouldn’t be sentenced.”
Now, I’m on record as saying Cankles will not go to jail. But the fact that the fake news media AP must get a story out there NOW specifically WITHOUT these words but implying them? That says a lot.