+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Twitter is buzzing
Drain the swamp.
Drain the swamp.
Drain the swamp.
Drain the swamp.
Drain the swamp.
The Department of Justice Inspector General has sent what is described as an extremely long and thorough draft of the report on the FBI and DOJ’s investigation and handling of the Hillary Clinton email probe. The detailed report on the FBI’s decision making process into the Clinton investigation could lead to possible criminal referrals for some of the officials involved in the case.
I asked a question which nobody has answered. BTW do you have any proof that Clinton is not involved? I mean if they colluded to quash the investigation, wouldn't it need her participation? What about the tarmac meeting? Without Hillary's actions regarding the server, there would have been no need for an investigation in the first place, so I'm not sure why you want to leave her out of the discussion.
I’m sure I don’t have to tell you but it’s not on Clinton or anyone else to prove she’s not involved merely for the prosecution to probe her guilt.
I know you’re salivating as you’ve read a few Fox News articles but steady on young man.
By the way i’ll Extend that charitable bet until end of July
If it is shown that there was a cover-up by the FBI & DOJ, what is left? A crime of storing classified information on an unsecured server right, so how can you prosecute the one and not the other?
Why the end of July? It's going to take them years to sort out this mess!
This is all a tad strange. You start a thread pronouncing that twitter is ablaze with the possible referral of Hillary Clinton for criminal prosecution without any seeming substance to support this followed by a reference to officials potentially under scrutiny in the OIG report. This morphed into a challenge to prove that she is not implicated. A bit like me saying that I heard rumours that Donald Trump fathered a number of illegitimate children and paid people off to cover this up. Prove that he didn't please?
I don't want to leave her out of the discussion as you state, quite the opposite as the thread was about her culpability. I was keen to understand the evidence you had to support bringing her into the conversation in the first place.