Good Question

Ace writes:

Trump tweeted the point that Mollie Hemingway has been making for a year, but which Marc Thiessen apparently picked up on: If it's "collusion" for Don Trump Jr. to have a meeting anticipating dirt on Hillary from Russia, why is not also collusion for Hillary to solicit dirt from high-ranking Kremlin officials -- as Steele's dossier called them -- about Trump? 

They never answer this question. 

I saw Mollie Hemingway make the point to Senorita Hayes. (Steven Hayes is now having a well-earned mid-life crisis in Spain for a year -- or uno ano, as they might dicer, so I like to think of him as Senorita Hayes, walking up and down the playa in ratty cargo pants, thinkin' about finally writin' that novel.) 

Senorita Hayes did not answer the point: He merely scoffed, as if the answer were so obvious it did not need to be formulated into human words. 

People do this when they actually do not have an answer at all and want to imply that they they have a Great Answer, such a Great Answer, a huge answer that it'll make your head spin. 

They demonstrate this intellectual mastery by making an animal noise of blowing air through their noses. Like a cow in the middle of chewing a tough divot of grass. 

So, just to be clear about this, Senorita Hayes and other cucks: I do not know the answer which you imply is so obvious as to need no articulation beyond making deer signalling noises through your perpetually-upturned snouts. 

So, as a favor to the Slow Kids in the back of the class: Would you Geniuses mind putting the distinction into human words? 

I mean you're all so smart and such craftsmen of Mindthoughts it should not be but a trifle to you. After all, the answer is so obvious it doesn't need to be said. 

I trust then that this undertaking will take you scarcely more time than hooting like an offended baboon. 

Failure to finally answer the point will prove the case that you have no answer at all.