zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. sleepy+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-12-17 02:51:26
At no point did the FBI order that tweets be taken down.
replies(1): >>oceanp+63
◧
2. oceanp+63[view] [source] 2022-12-17 03:12:23
>>sleepy+(OP)
Yeah, so it seems looking at the emails, which is the only piece of information we are allowed to see.

However if you think about it for a minute, if the FBI were this bold in written, subpoena-able communication, what do you think the offline conversations looked like?

replies(2): >>jacque+p3 >>djur+jd
◧◩
3. jacque+p3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-17 03:14:58
>>oceanp+63
If they had better they would definitely be showing it. So this is what there is.
◧◩
4. djur+jd[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-17 04:35:49
>>oceanp+63
"The evidence doesn't show malfeasance, but if you imagine other evidence that does show malfeasance, that would be bad" is not a compelling argument in any situation.
[go to top]