There were newly-recovered emails pertinent to a criminal investigation that hadn't been assessed. Why continue obfuscating about this?
-
-
Replying to @mtracey @mattyglesias
It was not accurate to call them new emails. They were the same emails and the FBI knew that. And it wasn't a criminal case.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @NickFalacci @mattyglesias
Your claim that "it wasn't a criminal case" proves beyond all doubt that you have no idea what you're talking about.
3 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @mtracey @mattyglesias
It was not a criminal case at the time. There would have had to been new emails with new evidence for that to happen.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NickFalacci @mattyglesias
It was a criminal case when it was closed in July and hence a criminal case when it resumed in October. You are wrong.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @NickFalacci @mattyglesias
Sending me random links is not going to prove your claim that it "was not a criminal investigation," which is 100% false.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @mtracey @mattyglesias
That was not a random link. Link to article that stated in July the FBI concluded that Clinton had not committed criminal wrong-doing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
And they determined that because they conducted a ***criminal investigation***, which was closed in July, and then re-opened in October.
-
-
Replying to @mtracey @mattyglesias
Yes, a criminal investigation ... in which no criminal wrong-doing was found. My mistake on the wording. You win.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
In the end ... the public was told the FBI had NEW emails from Clinton when the FBI did not know that.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
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.