On Russia collusion, maybe journalists should be asked some questions instead of Trump?

Since the media is back on the Russian collusion story, maybe we should assemble a panel consisting of White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders, President Trump, and others in their camp, where they ask CNN's Jim Acosta, American Urban Radio Network's April Ryan, and others blue-check journalists a series of questions that they should be willing to answer. After all, they have been endlessly and breathlessly reporting on this fictional story for almost two years. And since Jim Acosta would rather be the news than report the news, it's time to give him what he wants.

Here goes:

Was there any actual evidence that the Trump team colluded with Russia on the election or was it fake from the start? What would the crime be if people associated with Trump talked to people from Russia?  Didn't people surrounding Hillary Clinton talk with people from Russia? 
 
If there was no crime, what would Trump have obstructed? 
 
What do you think of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton paying as much as $10 million to create a fake dossier to destroy Trump?
 
What do you think of the Justice Department and the Obama administration using this fake dossier  as an excuse to spy on people surrounding Trump?
 
Since there was never any actual evidence that the dossier was true, should the media have reported it as if it was?
 
Former FBI Director James Comey listed a series of criminal violations by Hillary that he never prosecuted her for. Shouldn't Hillary and others have been prosecuted for their clear violations of the law?
 
Didn't Hillary, the DNC and others obstruct the law when they destroyed computers and refused access to computers for hacking?
 
Shouldn't others at the FBI and in the Obama administration be investigated and possibly prosecuted for their obvious protection of Hillary and their targeting of Trump?
 
Shouldn't any president fire someone like Comey for his clear preferential treatment instead of doing his job?
 
Why did Obama issue a stand-down order in the summer of 2016 to his cyber security chief to stop investigating Russian hacking? Was he hiding something or obstructing justice?
 
Who killed Seth Rich and why?
 
It is clear that many people surrounding Hillary and Obama committed crimes, commited perjury, and obstructed justice so why were there no prosecutions? Were they always above the law?
 
I am sure many others would have hundreds or even thousands of obvious questions, but somehow Acosta, Ryan and others aren't even curious. 
 
They say they want honesty in government, but their actions show that is absolutely not true. 
 
 

Since the media is back on the Russian collusion story, maybe we should assemble a panel consisting of White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders, President Trump, and others in their camp, where they ask CNN's Jim Acosta, American Urban Radio Network's April Ryan, and others blue-check journalists a series of questions that they should be willing to answer. After all, they have been endlessly and breathlessly reporting on this fictional story for almost two years. And since Jim Acosta would rather be the news than report the news, it's time to give him what he wants.

Here goes:

Was there any actual evidence that the Trump team colluded with Russia on the election or was it fake from the start? What would the crime be if people associated with Trump talked to people from Russia?  Didn't people surrounding Hillary Clinton talk with people from Russia? 
 
If there was no crime, what would Trump have obstructed? 
 
What do you think of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton paying as much as $10 million to create a fake dossier to destroy Trump?
 
What do you think of the Justice Department and the Obama administration using this fake dossier  as an excuse to spy on people surrounding Trump?
 
Since there was never any actual evidence that the dossier was true, should the media have reported it as if it was?
 
Former FBI Director James Comey listed a series of criminal violations by Hillary that he never prosecuted her for. Shouldn't Hillary and others have been prosecuted for their clear violations of the law?
 
Didn't Hillary, the DNC and others obstruct the law when they destroyed computers and refused access to computers for hacking?
 
Shouldn't others at the FBI and in the Obama administration be investigated and possibly prosecuted for their obvious protection of Hillary and their targeting of Trump?
 
Shouldn't any president fire someone like Comey for his clear preferential treatment instead of doing his job?
 
Why did Obama issue a stand-down order in the summer of 2016 to his cyber security chief to stop investigating Russian hacking? Was he hiding something or obstructing justice?
 
Who killed Seth Rich and why?
 
It is clear that many people surrounding Hillary and Obama committed crimes, commited perjury, and obstructed justice so why were there no prosecutions? Were they always above the law?
 
I am sure many others would have hundreds or even thousands of obvious questions, but somehow Acosta, Ryan and others aren't even curious. 
 
They say they want honesty in government, but their actions show that is absolutely not true.