Since as far as I can tell, the "content" is entirely fictional, what else is there to attack but the source?
Well why don't you prove it's fictional instead of flapping your yap?
No, that's not how it works. It's not up to me to "prove" your negative.
No, sorry....you are claiming the source is incorrect, it is you who must back up your "claim".
You can of course back up your claim can't you?
Nope. Seriously, take a logic class. The blog claims there's an FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation without providing any evidence that there is one. How exactly am I supposed to "prove" that that there there is a lack of an investigation?
Not the point old boy, the point is that only the intellectually bereft make a claim and then demand someone else "prove" THEIR claim.
Of course it's the point.
I'm truly amazed at how difficult critical thinking is for so many people.