(09-15-2022 10:45 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(09-15-2022 10:14 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I find it interesting that the Trumpistas here challenge even the widely reported presence of classified documents ("Have you seen them? List them all") ---- yet take gatewaypundit and redstate as gospel fact.

And unceasingly charge garbage like "corrupt magistrate" as gospel truth. The sheer hypocrisy is mind boggling.

I've seen a lot of judgmental and hypocritical posters here over the years but you may be the best ever. Congrats.

Please do tell what is incorrect about my post.... Im all ears.

But seriously -- even a day or two ago I mentioned the letter under oath here. Three different people yelled "prove it".

Between the wide reporting of the letter, and the mention of it in the filings by both parties, I would assume that the issue of whether that letter existed as such would be do extraordinarily heavy to really defy any 'have you actually seen it' style **** that passes as ordinary here.

But that is the pat response from multiple people here.

So I mentioned 'it is in the response'. One not so bright guy called me out as not having seen it -- which I had. and proceeded to hand guide him to where it could be found. And, honestly, given the amount of stuff emanating about the filings from this board, Im rather astounded that seemingly no one can ascertain where to pull up the original material.....

But, these are the same people who typically post self-styled 'facts' as a "corrupt magistrate".

So, tell me where I am incorrect. And yes, for that level of hypocrisy I absolutely will be judgmental.

Just in the last couple of minutes there have been multiples of people yelling 'have you seen the supposed classified marked documents'. Again, the existence of those documents existing, and having been pulled out of a basement and DJTs office in Mar a Lago seem amazingly corroborated. Literally tens of thousands of news accounts, photos in warrants, mentions of those documents in court filings --- I mean good fing god that schtick seems really stupid.

But a post from Gateway pundit where the magistrate recused himself from 'Trump v Clinton', and didnt even bother to mention that the recusal may very well have been because of the Clinton side of the docket with 7 other parties -- that is repeated as gospel truth. Absent any of the vim and vinegar given the letter under oath let alone the mere existence of classified marked material.

So, tell me where I am incorrect, or unduly harsh on those issues given that. The floor is yours.