(12-12-2022 04:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Whatabout is not totally irrelevant. It does have some precedential value. If presidents have been routinely doing this for years (as I would guess they have) then it seems inappropriate to decide suddenly to go after one and leave the others scot free.

If you want to deep six the issue of 'when it is kosher to walk off with confidential top secret SCIF level stuff' on the basis of 'whadabout' -- you are more than free to champion that cause.

I would prefer the opposite. And no, an ex-President should be treated the same as pretty much any other person in the country on this. I am not prepared to treat anyone who simply walks away with this stuff, anyone mind you, with a nod, a shush, and a wink.

I seem to remember even from you in the Rice board how if you had been found with anything like Hillary had on here disk you would be facing prison time -- and noted that it should be so for anyone who did.

Now, ostensibly, we do have just an 'anyone who did'. I guess that has changed in the interim to that it should not be so?

(12-12-2022 04:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -
https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

I don't know whether Obama did or not. At this point I am extremely distrustful of any statement made by any federal agency, so I would not take NARA's statement as slam dunk proof.

Although not former presidents (which certainly does not make it better), I am quite certain that Hillary and Sandy Berger, among others, did.

And at this point, there is no actual EVIDENCE that Donald Trump has done anything wrong? There are allegations, but the plural of allegation is not evidence.

We ostensibly have as much evidence as Hillary's forays through mounds of court filings detailing the issue. And nothing there that controverts that. One is believable and one is not? If so, what is the line that produces the 'quite certain' in the case of Hills and the 'no ACTUAL EVIDENCE' (along with the comment of allegations and evidence) that seems to exist for you in the case of Trump and his Florida squirrel nut cache?

(12-12-2022 05:04 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Whatabout is not totally irrelevant. It does have some precedential value. If presidents have been routinely doing this for years (as I would guess they have) then it seems inappropriate to decide suddenly to go after one and leave the others scot free.

But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -

https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

By Biden's archive people. If you try to think for yourself instead of parroting administration lies, you might have found the press reports from the time of disputes between Obama and the Archives. This is a political press release and you fell for it.

As opposed to the "truth" bleated by Gateway Pundit and all that set of information sources that seemingly forms the hard basis for the 'Obama did it' thesis..... got it.

(12-12-2022 05:01 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Whatabout is not totally irrelevant. It does have some precedential value. If presidents have been routinely doing this for years (as I would guess they have) then it seems inappropriate to decide suddenly to go after one and leave the others scot free.

But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -

https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

The truth as we all know it is that there is absolutely no evidence that has been used to find Trump guilty of anything. The only ‘evidence’ is what the Russia Russia Russia team has leaked to the press. That seems to be enough to arrest any “private citizen” in short order. Why hasn’t he been arrested yet?

Maybe you need to read up on the filings in the court cases.

Do you understand that it was your demigod that threw a massive wrench into the investigation based on getting a Florida District judge to make up a whole new side of jurisdiction that never existed before?

Or perhaps you dont think there should be any investigation, just an immediate arrest? Double lolz. Thats a smart position to take....

My preference is that a thorough investigation take place. If Trump cant be charged -- so be it. And if he can, I think it should be thoroughly looked into.

On the other side of the fence we have the third-grade level logic in the comment of 'why hasnt he been arrested yet, and since he hasnt it is unfair.' That sounds like a smashing great leap of logic.

(11-20-2022 08:56 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(11-20-2022 12:55 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2022 01:54 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(11-19-2022 01:27 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(11-19-2022 11:15 AM)Kruciff Wrote:  I just don't understand how Hillary Clinton is relevant here anyway. She's been pretty much out of national politics since 2016. I feel like even addressing these clear whatabouts is a waste of time

Here, I will help you out.

Double Standard,
dou·ble stand·ard
/ˈdəbəl ˈstandərd/
noun
a rule or principle which is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups.
"the prolonged consideration of the issue represented a double standard"

So let me see if I get this straight. You think Trump shouldn't be investigated because it's... Unfair?

You liberals seem to have forgotten that it was Trump who instructed the DOJ to end the investigation of HRC upon his inauguration. He said in his statement that we don’t investigate our political rivals in this country like they do in failed states.

Of course THAT WAS HIS BIGGEST MISTAKE!

He was to naive to understand the depth to which democrats will go to gain power. He learned the hard way that they care absolutely nothing about anything but regaining it at any cost.

Here's a thought: What if Trump lied? What if he made all the hubbub about HRC up because it would hurt her campaign while helping his. Of course he "cancelled" the investigation, conveniently soon after the election, he had no use for her anymore.

Does that sound like something Donald J Trump would do? Lie for his own benefit?

You think he made it all up??

(12-12-2022 05:30 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -
https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

I don't know whether Obama did or not. At this point I am extremely distrustful of any statement made by any federal agency, so I would not take NARA's statement as slam dunk proof.

Although not former presidents (which certainly does not make it better), I am quite certain that Hillary and Sandy Berger, among others, did.

And at this point, there is no actual EVIDENCE that Donald Trump has done anything wrong? There are allegations, but the plural of allegation is not evidence.

We ostensibly have as much evidence as Hillary's forays through mounds of court filings detailing the issue. And nothing there that controverts that. One is believable and one is not? If so, what is the line that produces the 'quite certain' in the case of Hills and the 'no ACTUAL EVIDENCE' (along with the comment of allegations and evidence) that seems to exist for you in the case of Trump and his Florida squirrel nut cache?

Have you seen the evidence ? It's a yes or no answer.

(12-12-2022 05:30 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If so, what is the line that produces the 'quite certain' in the case of Hills and the 'no ACTUAL EVIDENCE' (along with the comment of allegations and evidence) that seems to exist for you in the case of Trump and his Florida squirrel nut cache?

It is my understanding that there is a significant amount of specifically identified evidence in the case of Hillary, evidence sufficient to have sent me to Leavenworth for 20 to 40 had I done what she did when I had my TS clearance. i have not seen comparable specificity with respect to Trump. I have missed anything, feel free to point me to it.

(12-12-2022 07:42 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:30 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -
https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

I don't know whether Obama did or not. At this point I am extremely distrustful of any statement made by any federal agency, so I would not take NARA's statement as slam dunk proof.

Although not former presidents (which certainly does not make it better), I am quite certain that Hillary and Sandy Berger, among others, did.

And at this point, there is no actual EVIDENCE that Donald Trump has done anything wrong? There are allegations, but the plural of allegation is not evidence.

We ostensibly have as much evidence as Hillary's forays through mounds of court filings detailing the issue. And nothing there that controverts that. One is believable and one is not? If so, what is the line that produces the 'quite certain' in the case of Hills and the 'no ACTUAL EVIDENCE' (along with the comment of allegations and evidence) that seems to exist for you in the case of Trump and his Florida squirrel nut cache?

Have you seen the evidence ? It's a yes or no answer.

I doubt anyone in the public has "seen" the evidence as a whole. I have not.

Shall I pull up some of your assertions from the past and ask you if you have personally seen the evidence in those?

(12-12-2022 09:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:30 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If so, what is the line that produces the 'quite certain' in the case of Hills and the 'no ACTUAL EVIDENCE' (along with the comment of allegations and evidence) that seems to exist for you in the case of Trump and his Florida squirrel nut cache?

It is my understanding that there is a significant amount of specifically identified evidence in the case of Hillary, evidence sufficient to have sent me to Leavenworth for 20 to 40 had I done what she did when I had my TS clearance. i have not seen comparable specificity with respect to Trump. I have missed anything, feel free to point me to it.

TDS!!! It is real, his mean tweets literally broke people.

(12-12-2022 05:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:01 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Whatabout is not totally irrelevant. It does have some precedential value. If presidents have been routinely doing this for years (as I would guess they have) then it seems inappropriate to decide suddenly to go after one and leave the others scot free.

But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -

https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

The truth as we all know it is that there is absolutely no evidence that has been used to find Trump guilty of anything. The only ‘evidence’ is what the Russia Russia Russia team has leaked to the press. That seems to be enough to arrest any “private citizen” in short order. Why hasn’t he been arrested yet?

Maybe you need to read up on the filings in the court cases.

Do you understand that it was your demigod that threw a massive wrench into the investigation based on getting a Florida District judge to make up a whole new side of jurisdiction that never existed before?

Or perhaps you dont think there should be any investigation, just an immediate arrest? Double lolz. Thats a smart position to take....

My preference is that a thorough investigation take place. If Trump cant be charged -- so be it. And if he can, I think it should be thoroughly looked into.

On the other side of the fence we have the third-grade level logic in the comment of 'why hasnt he been arrested yet, and since he hasnt it is unfair.' That sounds like a smashing great leap of logic.

My “third grade logic” tells me that if I were found with all of this so called evidence presented by the government in your “court filings” that I would not be walking the streets. Your great law brain can’t quite explain that.
What happened to the nuclear secrets? That should do it quite nicely.
And finally you are not the boss of anyone here. So I’ll ask again, when are they going to arrest this “private citizen” for possession of Top Secret nuclear and or SCIFF documents? You’re the law expert. Explain it without smug comments about process because we all know with the evidence that has been plastered all over the media anyone else would have been in custody by now.

(12-12-2022 11:58 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:01 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Whatabout is not totally irrelevant. It does have some precedential value. If presidents have been routinely doing this for years (as I would guess they have) then it seems inappropriate to decide suddenly to go after one and leave the others scot free.

But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -

https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

The truth as we all know it is that there is absolutely no evidence that has been used to find Trump guilty of anything. The only ‘evidence’ is what the Russia Russia Russia team has leaked to the press. That seems to be enough to arrest any “private citizen” in short order. Why hasn’t he been arrested yet?

Maybe you need to read up on the filings in the court cases.

Do you understand that it was your demigod that threw a massive wrench into the investigation based on getting a Florida District judge to make up a whole new side of jurisdiction that never existed before?

Or perhaps you dont think there should be any investigation, just an immediate arrest? Double lolz. Thats a smart position to take....

My preference is that a thorough investigation take place. If Trump cant be charged -- so be it. And if he can, I think it should be thoroughly looked into.

On the other side of the fence we have the third-grade level logic in the comment of 'why hasnt he been arrested yet, and since he hasnt it is unfair.' That sounds like a smashing great leap of logic.

My “third grade logic” tells me that if I were found with all of this so called evidence presented by the government in your “court filings” that I would not be walking the streets. Your great law brain can’t quite explain that.

What do you disagree with in the court filings, sparkles? To the extent that you "" them? Maybe since Alex Jones disagrees with them, that is good with you? Or maybe better yet Gateway Pundit?

Your obvious grasp of things doesnt seem to find its way to the other things: a) former President; b) Trump filed an unprecedented mass of filings to delay the investigation, but I guess that flew over that razor sharp observation machine you got going; c) I'd prefer a full investigation -- that is as opposed to the ideal that you think should happen that 'lets just hit everything with a sledge hammer and see where it falls; d) the authorities need to know as much as possible about what Trump knew about the papers. Again, Cannon hit them with a set of rulings that stalled them out; e) much like an investigation into an organized crime case, the authorities should take care in detailing all of the people involved, and ot what extent.

Instead of sitting around whining, maybe think about it a tad. It helps.

Quote:What happened to the nuclear secrets?

So now anything in the news reports is mentioned as some sort of 'proof' that Trump wasnt squirreling stuff away? Seriously?

Quote:That should do it quite nicely.

Yep, I suggest you call up the Special Counsel Smith and tell him that ol' Wa Soms tells him he should stand down. Nothing like that iceberg mind presented at its finest above.

Quote:And finally you are not the boss of anyone here.

Never said I was, sparkles.

Quote: So I’ll ask again, when are they going to arrest this “private citizen” for possession of Top Secret nuclear and or SCIFF documents?

Told you before -- dont know. I guess you dont understand that phrase. I take it you dont think Trump is a "private citizen" by the above?

Quote:You’re the law expert. Explain it without smug comments about process because we all know with the evidence that has been plastered all over the media anyone else would have been in custody by now.

That seems like a real dumbshit rule of law. Since they havent arrested him, he must be innocent. Good grief......

(12-13-2022 12:17 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 11:58 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:01 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -

https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

The truth as we all know it is that there is absolutely no evidence that has been used to find Trump guilty of anything. The only ‘evidence’ is what the Russia Russia Russia team has leaked to the press. That seems to be enough to arrest any “private citizen” in short order. Why hasn’t he been arrested yet?

Maybe you need to read up on the filings in the court cases.

Do you understand that it was your demigod that threw a massive wrench into the investigation based on getting a Florida District judge to make up a whole new side of jurisdiction that never existed before?

Or perhaps you dont think there should be any investigation, just an immediate arrest? Double lolz. Thats a smart position to take....

My preference is that a thorough investigation take place. If Trump cant be charged -- so be it. And if he can, I think it should be thoroughly looked into.

On the other side of the fence we have the third-grade level logic in the comment of 'why hasnt he been arrested yet, and since he hasnt it is unfair.' That sounds like a smashing great leap of logic.

My “third grade logic” tells me that if I were found with all of this so called evidence presented by the government in your “court filings” that I would not be walking the streets. Your great law brain can’t quite explain that.

What do you disagree with in the court filings, sparkles? To the extent that you "" them? Maybe since Alex Jones disagrees with them, that is good with you? Or maybe better yet Gateway Pundit?

Your obvious grasp of things doesnt seem to find its way to the other things: a) former President; b) Trump filed an unprecedented mass of filings to delay the investigation, but I guess that flew over that razor sharp observation machine you got going; c) I'd prefer a full investigation -- that is as opposed to the ideal that you think should happen that 'lets just hit everything with a sledge hammer and see where it falls; d) the authorities need to know as much as possible about what Trump knew about the papers. Again, Cannon hit them with a set of rulings that stalled them out; e) much like an investigation into an organized crime case, the authorities should take care in detailing all of the people involved, and ot what extent.

Instead of sitting around whining, maybe think about it a tad. It helps.

Quote:What happened to the nuclear secrets?

So now anything in the news reports is mentioned as some sort of 'proof' that Trump wasnt squirreling stuff away? Seriously?

Quote:That should do it quite nicely.

Yep, I suggest you call up the Special Counsel Smith and tell him that ol' Wa Soms tells him he should stand down. Nothing like that iceberg mind presented at its finest above.

Quote:And finally you are not the boss of anyone here.

Never said I was, sparkles.

Quote: So I’ll ask again, when are they going to arrest this “private citizen” for possession of Top Secret nuclear and or SCIFF documents?

Told you before -- dont know. I guess you dont understand that phrase. I take it you dont think Trump is a "private citizen" by the above?

Quote:You’re the law expert. Explain it without smug comments about process because we all know with the evidence that has been plastered all over the media anyone else would have been in custody by now.

That seems like a real dumbshit rule of law. Since they havent arrested him, he must be innocent. Good grief......

A bunch of bullchit there Ginbreath. None of it good enough.
Answer this question in your best bullchit legalese, would I be in jail at this moment had the FBI raided my home and found the folders pictured in their little “lookie here what we found” press release?
You are as obsessed with Trump as the complete loons here on this board. And that’s saying something. Maybe you should give yourself a break and just wait and see if they final arrest him.
BTW, when are they going to arrest Trump?

(12-13-2022 12:26 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-13-2022 12:17 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 11:58 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:41 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:01 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  The truth as we all know it is that there is absolutely no evidence that has been used to find Trump guilty of anything. The only ‘evidence’ is what the Russia Russia Russia team has leaked to the press. That seems to be enough to arrest any “private citizen” in short order. Why hasn’t he been arrested yet?

Maybe you need to read up on the filings in the court cases.

Do you understand that it was your demigod that threw a massive wrench into the investigation based on getting a Florida District judge to make up a whole new side of jurisdiction that never existed before?

Or perhaps you dont think there should be any investigation, just an immediate arrest? Double lolz. Thats a smart position to take....

My preference is that a thorough investigation take place. If Trump cant be charged -- so be it. And if he can, I think it should be thoroughly looked into.

On the other side of the fence we have the third-grade level logic in the comment of 'why hasnt he been arrested yet, and since he hasnt it is unfair.' That sounds like a smashing great leap of logic.

My “third grade logic” tells me that if I were found with all of this so called evidence presented by the government in your “court filings” that I would not be walking the streets. Your great law brain can’t quite explain that.

What do you disagree with in the court filings, sparkles? To the extent that you "" them? Maybe since Alex Jones disagrees with them, that is good with you? Or maybe better yet Gateway Pundit?

Your obvious grasp of things doesnt seem to find its way to the other things: a) former President; b) Trump filed an unprecedented mass of filings to delay the investigation, but I guess that flew over that razor sharp observation machine you got going; c) I'd prefer a full investigation -- that is as opposed to the ideal that you think should happen that 'lets just hit everything with a sledge hammer and see where it falls; d) the authorities need to know as much as possible about what Trump knew about the papers. Again, Cannon hit them with a set of rulings that stalled them out; e) much like an investigation into an organized crime case, the authorities should take care in detailing all of the people involved, and ot what extent.

Instead of sitting around whining, maybe think about it a tad. It helps.

Quote:What happened to the nuclear secrets?

So now anything in the news reports is mentioned as some sort of 'proof' that Trump wasnt squirreling stuff away? Seriously?

Quote:That should do it quite nicely.

Yep, I suggest you call up the Special Counsel Smith and tell him that ol' Wa Soms tells him he should stand down. Nothing like that iceberg mind presented at its finest above.

Quote:And finally you are not the boss of anyone here.

Never said I was, sparkles.

Quote: So I’ll ask again, when are they going to arrest this “private citizen” for possession of Top Secret nuclear and or SCIFF documents?

Told you before -- dont know. I guess you dont understand that phrase. I take it you dont think Trump is a "private citizen" by the above?

Quote:You’re the law expert. Explain it without smug comments about process because we all know with the evidence that has been plastered all over the media anyone else would have been in custody by now.

That seems like a real dumbshit rule of law. Since they havent arrested him, he must be innocent. Good grief......

A bunch of bullchit there Ginbreath. None of it good enough.

Aww.... poow widdwe Was Soms getting maddy poo.....

Quote:Answer this question in your best bullchit legalese, would I be in jail at this moment had the FBI raided my home and found the folders pictured in their little “lookie here what we found” press release?

If your house had scores of employees, scores of guests, and you also happened to talk a Federal judge into entertaining your song and dance about 'pre indictment Special Master' tinted with 'attorney client privilege' and heaping helping of 'executive privilege', along with s side shuffle of 'they are mine when I declassify them by Jedi mind trick since you are the President', perhaps not.

But, look at you equating you and your house to that.

Quote:You are as obsessed with Trump as the complete loons here on this board. And that’s saying something. Maybe you should give yourself a break and just wait and see if they final arrest him.

Im not the one continuously dripping cream gravy down the front of my shirt while trying to do the continuous third grade question of 'when are they going to arrest Trump'.

Quote:BTW, when are they going to arrest Trump?

And like clockwork the dumb*** question gets repeated. Good for you.... (slow clap).

I guess you *still* dont understand the term 'dont know' since you keep beating those words together like the windup monkey toy hitting those cymbals together in a ceaseless blather.

(12-12-2022 09:35 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 07:42 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:30 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:35 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  But is there any actual evidence that this has been a problem with other former Presidents? I'm aware of nothing other than Trump's lie that President Obama took documents too. This lie was exposed back in August by the authoritative source on the matter, the National Archives and Records Administration -
https://www.archives.gov/press/press-rel...st-12-2022

I don't know whether Obama did or not. At this point I am extremely distrustful of any statement made by any federal agency, so I would not take NARA's statement as slam dunk proof.

Although not former presidents (which certainly does not make it better), I am quite certain that Hillary and Sandy Berger, among others, did.

And at this point, there is no actual EVIDENCE that Donald Trump has done anything wrong? There are allegations, but the plural of allegation is not evidence.

We ostensibly have as much evidence as Hillary's forays through mounds of court filings detailing the issue. And nothing there that controverts that. One is believable and one is not? If so, what is the line that produces the 'quite certain' in the case of Hills and the 'no ACTUAL EVIDENCE' (along with the comment of allegations and evidence) that seems to exist for you in the case of Trump and his Florida squirrel nut cache?

Have you seen the evidence ? It's a yes or no answer.

I doubt anyone in the public has "seen" the evidence as a whole. I have not.

Shall I pull up some of your assertions from the past and ask you if you have personally seen the evidence in those?

Go ahead sport, pull up anything that I have said around here. Hey has Trump been arrested yet.

(12-13-2022 01:05 AM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 09:35 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 07:42 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 05:30 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(12-12-2022 04:48 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't know whether Obama did or not. At this point I am extremely distrustful of any statement made by any federal agency, so I would not take NARA's statement as slam dunk proof.

Although not former presidents (which certainly does not make it better), I am quite certain that Hillary and Sandy Berger, among others, did.

And at this point, there is no actual EVIDENCE that Donald Trump has done anything wrong? There are allegations, but the plural of allegation is not evidence.

We ostensibly have as much evidence as Hillary's forays through mounds of court filings detailing the issue. And nothing there that controverts that. One is believable and one is not? If so, what is the line that produces the 'quite certain' in the case of Hills and the 'no ACTUAL EVIDENCE' (along with the comment of allegations and evidence) that seems to exist for you in the case of Trump and his Florida squirrel nut cache?

Have you seen the evidence ? It's a yes or no answer.

I doubt anyone in the public has "seen" the evidence as a whole. I have not.

Shall I pull up some of your assertions from the past and ask you if you have personally seen the evidence in those?

Go ahead sport, pull up anything that I have said around here. Hey has Trump been arrested yet.

I see the Rain Man issue is contagious.

Yeah but has Trump been arrested yet?

Ginbreath is broken, triggered and wondering when they will finally get around to arresting Trump.