The complete absence of horrified reaction at the raid on Rudy Giuliani's apartment means that we've quietly abandoned four years of pretending there's a norm against federal investigations of the president's political opponents.
-
-
This is nonsense. There *were* evidence-based investigations into Secretary Clinton. The standard is that no one is investigated simply for who they are. Rudy's investigation, beginning under Barr, related to things he did, not who he was.
-
Aside from Benghazi, Barr launched his own investigation, which ended with not even a whimper
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The Benghazi hearings were admitted to be for show by Kevin McCarthy.
-
When they knew she was the likely Dem nominee.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I’ll help, Dan: Hillary Clinton didn’t break the law, and Rudy Giuliani did. That’s why it’s bad to prosecute one and good to prosecute the other. Does that clear things up for you?
-
They want to try so hard to make this about something more than it actually is. Criminals, regardless of political party, need to face consequences. This investigation started when Trump was in office. Barr did everything he could to slow it down - that should be the focus here.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
He said "lock her up"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"There's no way to tell if an investigation is complete laughable bullshit, anyone trying to distinguish between two different investigations is operating in bad faith and I am very smart to think this."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You are inventing a standard that didn’t exist and then applying that made-up standard in bad faith. Which is kinda your thing.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.