this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
176 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
1000 readers
359 users here now
For civil discussion of US politics. Be excellent to each other.
Rule 1-3, 6 & 7 No longer applicable
Rule 4: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a jerk. It’s not acceptable to say another user is a jerk. Cussing is fine.
Rule 5: Be excellent to each other. Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, ableist, will be removed.
The Epstein Files: Trump, Trafficking, and the Unraveling Cover-Up
Info Video about techniques used in cults (and politics)
Bookmark Vault of Trump's First Term
Media owners, CEOs and/or board members
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
does the state of Minnesota really have to just hand the investigation off to the FBI?
Is there a Minnesota law saying they have to do that?
or is this one of those things where the democrats follow norms and traditions while the fascists look for any weird loophole and then just break the law if they don’t find one?
I see no reason they cannot have two investigations.
They won't have access to physical evidence, but they've got plenty of video, and that's enough to make a conclusive case.
When the Feds come down with a finding of no wrongdoing, Minnesota will have enough to charge him.
When FBI holds evidence and refuses to let the state have access to it, that makes it real hard for the state to do anything.
They have the videos and they could get witness accounts. It should be ample.
This also has to do with being able to pardon federal convictions.
I do agree. But they can still charge the guy based on the evidence they have.
They did start a second investigation. But the FBI literally stood in their way to prevent BCA from access to the scene. Once the FBI had collected the evidence, the BCA was further obstructed from accessing the collected evidence.