And once I pointed that out to you you claimed I was defending the dossier, which couldn't be more hysterical.
You're suggesting the FBI that 1) made comments about Hillary of the type specifically prohibited on July 5 2) sent another letter of the type prohibited on October 27 BECAUSE so many Agents were already leaking was weaponized against TRUMP? Are you sure?
-
-
I happen to think the investigation into Hillary's server was legit. In the same way I think the investigation into Trump's targeting by RU is legit. I've got Qs abt both, but far less burning Qs abt the Trump one.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What are you talking about with “comments specifically prohibited”?
-
DOJ generally does not permit comments about people who've not been charged, and it generally does not permit comments abt investigations in lead up to those investigations. Both happened w/Hillary.
-
Comey isn’t in prison, so while it may be frowned upon it’s clearly not illegal, right?
-
Neither is approving a FISA application because you invested too much faith in the past track record of a private intelligence consultant.
-
And, in case you forget, the cover story for why Comey was fired was precisely those statements. So either obstruction or Comey was punished for them.
-
He should have been fired. No doubt about it.
-
So then you're saying that FBI was weaponized against Hillary.
-
Lol. No. I’m saying she should be in prison right now. Some people in high places let her go. That’s the exact opposite of weaponizing.
- 21 more replies
New conversation -
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.