I am simply reflecting what the law says.
Your inability to not properly differentiate between the law as it relates to investigating facts v
has nothing to do with how the law should proceed........
On this thread I have promoted the law and what should be done relative to the law.
You yap endlessly about "the law".....................please cite what law or statute you are referring to.
Hilary, for example, clearly as reported by various sources & undisputed, broke numerous "laws"...........what is the "law" waiting for in prosecuting her for any one of several offences?
If you're talking about evidence that a crime. i.e., some "law" was broken, then yes, Barr, Durham & all the rest who have been endlessly "investigating" have had more than ample time to gather & acquire evidence to prove a crime(s) were committed.........................if they really wanted to.
That's my problem with what's going on...........from the "evidence" or lack of, given the
YEARS of supposed investigation, the only conclusion that can be drawn at this point in time is that they simply do not really want to prosecute anyone of consequence.
MM
