Anybody with 'any' shred of objectivity that's actually listened to the questions and answers in the OIG/Wray testimonies can see with absolute clarity that, while I can understand they 'may' view the GOP as making more out of the situation than it is (in their mind), they clearly and more importantly see that the Democrats have absolutely NOTHING to say.

The Dems are being exposed as having zero concern for the rule of law and only care about deflecting, projecting and pontification for their more rabid base.

(((They))) are losing bigly in the minds of the electorate - and I'm actually a little shocked they can't feel the walls closing in on them.

>>1821290

>Anybody with 'any' shred of objectivity that's actually listened to the questions and answers in the OIG/Wray testimonies can see with absolute clarity that, while I can understand they 'may' view the GOP as making more out of the situation than it is (in their mind), they clearly and more importantly see that the Democrats have absolutely NOTHING to say.

>The Dems are being exposed as having zero concern for the rule of law and only care about deflecting, projecting and pontification for their more rabid base.

>(((They))) are losing bigly in the minds of the electorate - and I'm actually a little shocked they can't feel the walls closing in on them.

As for the OIG Report itself, and the declaration that there was no evidenciary proof of bias affecting the decision to prosecute - that much is actually 100% true. As Horowitz stated to D-Cummings, it is/was the prosecutor's decision to actually levy charges against (anyone) Clinton.

That said, there now needs (and oh my god badly) to be an OIG investigation of the DoJ - and why hasn't there been already? Or was I just not paying attention and there is (publicly anyway)

>>1821419

Mossad co-intel pro agent.

Avoid.