(12-28-2021 10:10 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(12-28-2021 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Biden and justice

This is from The Hill. I don't know if that a good source or a bad source, according to the folks to whom source is important, but I read the article and think the content is important.

Read it. This was weird:

Quote:Even before winning the White House, Biden refused to wait for the actual facts before reaching a popular conclusion. For example, after the protests in Lafayette Park in 2020, Biden repeated the now debunked claim that the park was cleared with tear gas to enable a photo op for President Trump. From the outset, there was ample evidence undermining that claim, but neither Biden nor many in the media waited for the investigation to establish the facts. (Later, the Justice Department's inspector general disproved the claim).

When I read the hyperlink (where the IG's office "disproved" this claim) there seems to be no mention of tear gas. How, then, was this report conclusive re: tear gas?

https://www.doioig.gov/reports/review/re...yette-park

Did I miss it? I'm reading quickly at work.

*edit*

Perhaps it's in the larger report file linked at the bottom of the original hyperlink? Don't have time....

I don't know whether or not tear gas was used, or by whom, or why. What do you think of the article's thesis, that Biden tends to jump to and advocate legal conclusions before all the evidence is available, for instance, the Rhittenhouse claims? Feel free not to answer if you are busy.