The following quote is from the IG report. It’s a statement regarding F_I and DOJ policy. It’s in reference to something different, but wouldn’t policy be policy? And did they implement stricter guidelines? It’s on page 247.

“The common principle underlying these policies is that neither the FBI nor Department prosecutors are permitted to insinuate or allege that an individual who has not been charged with a crime is nevertheless guilty of some wrongdoing. We see no reason why an unindicted co- conspirator should be afforded greater protection than a person who has been investigated and found not to be criminally liable. We therefore recommend that the Department and the FBI consider adopting a policy addressing the appropriateness of Department employees discussing uncharged conduct in public statements.

>>6632548

Forgot to include. Did Mueller screw up yesterday?

>>6632569

>>6632573

Agree, was moar asking in terms of a violation of policy that’s at least public.

>>6632607

Just thinking if there is a way, that’s already in the public, that can be used to discredit the investigation.

>>6632710

>lymes

Your ignorance is showing. Not to mention your other posts.

>>6632993

It is. So why would you tell them to go somewhere else? Isn’t that trying to dissuade free speech that you seem so adamant about? Quite a counterintuitive agrgument coupled with that 3rd tier ‘meme’ makes you so believable. Good luck in your endeavors, you’re going to need it.