It’s wild how someone can call for something to happen and then get upset when it does because you didn’t like what it said.
1 Like
Not exactly. Congress passed a law that got signed by the President that they have to release the files by law. Of course the deadline to release was a while ago and still tons not released.
The fact is, up until it was clear that law would pass Congress, the DOJ was not releasing anything nor were they planning to.
2 Likes
Yeah, they were ultimately told to by the president.
Yea I guess so. Though they haven’t done a great job of it. But it is a massive undertaking so maybe going as well as it could? I don’t know.
What makes you write that?
What makes you think I do not appreciate the files released?
What I do not appreciate is your double standard rtcoog. One more time:
no politics or dog website links
What I do not appreciate is you letting innuendos RUN this thread.
One more time:
The doj is releasing millions of files as wanted by the general public. The doj has been very clear from the release of these same files. Countless of these files are false, innuendos, opinions etc.
What are you doing is letting posters accusing a certain someone of wrong doing with no proofs to back it up. Again, if they were any proofs that someone would be behind bars already.
I have two teenage daughters and believe me child trafficking, rape, sexual assault is a main concern for us or any parent.
Your choice is to let posters make innuendos/oriented farcical posts or not.
You do realize you have made some of those type of posts yourself in this very thread or don’t you?.
Do you even understand why the doj did not want to release the files, millions of files?
Because this is an on going investigation.
Now you have millions and millions of files. Most of them are false, debunked, innuendos, opinions.
Trust in the doj. You did tell us the same thing a few months ago. Didn’t you?
Doesn’t matter why they did not want to at this point, they are currently breaking the law by not releasing all of them.
Don’t remember saying that.
You know better than the doj? But I thought you had faith in the doj. You did tell us that a few months ago.
You accused him, let’s see the proof. Please.
1 Like
Show me where I said that.
Exactly, this entire thread is taking fake, innuendos, opinions for face value. There is a derangement syndrome that keeps getting bigger and bigger.
Nothing made me.
Your posts.
We are here to talk about the files, not politics. I don’t know about any dog website links. But I’m fine with them, I think.
I think they are mostly in your head tbh.
Some are, some aren’t.
I didn’t stop anyone from saying anything about anyone on the other side either.
Who is they? And who is using innuendo?
It’s the worst thing imaginable.
I’m letting you too.
More innuendo?
1 Like
Lots of them.
R.I.P. Mrs. O’Hara.
I’m serious. You might be here for something else. I’m not.
Innuendo and sarcasm must survive this administration
Again rtcoog, why are you doing that? This is not in the Coogfans spirit.
Let the files be released but more importantly lets argue on files that are proven true and surely the doj will act on them. Otherwise we have posters posting that this or that makes this person or another guilty.
This is likely going to start an argument. But you want proof of what I said here…
Exhibit A - innuendo that a picture of a former President in a hot tub is proof of wrong doing.
Example B - Flight logs don’t prove wrong doing either, only innuendo. This post was a response to a post on Clinton’s official statement.
Example C - Claiming “fake” data was planted in the files. This is the first of many instances of this or a similar claim, including one I responded to today.
I rest my case.
1 Like