Chomper Higgot

Did you miss the bit about it already being under investigation?

“Incredibly disingenuous way to frame Biden being found in possession of stolen classified documents strewn across multiple locations.” I’ve helped you with your misunderstanding of what ‘disingenuous’ means by underlining a couple of examples from your own post.

Why is a VP having classified documents a problem?

Next up, why did he steel them?!

I’m increasingly certain you are at least partially correct, Trump will go down.

Surely you are aware impeachment relates to behavior in the office being impeached? Alleged sins prior to coming into that office are not impeachable.

We’ll do have a few facts on our side.

What interest do you think Musk’s ’Twitter co-investor’ the Saudi Prince Alwaleed has in Freedom of Speech in America? Once you’ve answered that explain to us what the First Amendment has to do with Twitter (a private business)? https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattdurot/2022/10/31/saudi-prince-alwaleed-becomes-twitters-second-largest-shareholder/?sh=7fefb4b3523a

If you won what would you do about begging letters, would you still send them?

Good to see President Biden’s lawyers being thorough in their searching and acting decisively to report this find. I hope to see the USAG acting decisively to investigate this second self reported find. If criminality is found, then indict. The criminal holding, withholding or concealment of classified documents should always be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If criminality is not found, make a clear unequivocal statement to that effect.

The problem is, how reliable is the record keeping?

Do enlighten us, where do you get your propaganda free news on the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Biden has questions to answer, and the investigation needs to determine the facts, only then will anyone be able to say whether or not Biden should be in a lot of hot water. We know, by example, attempts were made over many months to retrieve classified documents from Trump, it’s only after months of his obstruction that the DOJ moved against him. ……. What’s all this about ‘De-classification’ why have you inserted that into your response?

Just to be clear, when I said this earlier, it’s not something I cut and pasted from a Trump supporter:

In the Trump case there is clear indication of criminality and obstruction. In the Biden case there is clear indication of self reporting and cooperation. I stand by my first post in this thread:

No I did not. I made a statement about the definition of the term ‘Out of context’ and backed up my system with a link to a dictionary definition of the term ‘Out of context’. I did not quote anything. Stop it with your misrepresentation of the posts I have made and the intention of my chosen wording. Give it up already.

You deny being confused over the difference and then state they are the same thing. If the cases are not the same then Biden didn’t do the same thing as Trump. Simples.

Nonsense, I made a statement on a definition and then backed it up with a link to an actual dictionary definition. My statement was not a quote, partial or otherwise Give it up already.

Only if you yourself are confused between Trump’s deliberate removal, concealing and retaining documents with Biden’s team finding documents and immediately reporting and returning them.

That’s something you’ll need to take up with The Sun, here’s the headline again, incase you missed it: “CAPTAIN DANGER Prince Harry has put British troops’ lives in danger by boasting about his 25 Taliban kills, say ex-military chiefs”

So defend out of context quotations with a truncated, and therefore ‘out of context’ quotation: “If words are used out of context, only a small separate part of what was originally said or written is reported, with the result that their meaning is not clear or is not understood:“ Quit wriggling.

Opinions differ.

Partial quotes are by definition ’Out of context’ https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/out-of-context

Here’s a claim that he boasted of killing 25 Afghans followed by Harry’s response and the full context of the quotation to put it back in context : The Sun: “Harry, 38, writes in his book Spare that killing 25 Taliban fighters in Afghanistan was like “chess pieces taken off the board”. The BBC: "It wasn't a statistic that filled me with pride but nor did it make me ashamed," he writes. "When I was plunged into the heat and confusion of battle, I didn't think about those as 25 people. You can't kill people if you see them as people. "In truth, you can't hurt people if you see them as people. They were chess pieces taken off the board, bad guys eliminated before they kill good guys." https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/20966702/prince-harry-put-british-troops-danger-taliban-killing-boasts/ https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64231560

I’m not ‘blaming the gutter press’. I’m simply making the factual observation that the ‘gutter press’ (that which hounded William and Harry’s mother) are in the habit of sensationalism and quoting out of context. I stand by my first comment on this matter: I haven’t made any excuses for Harry’s behavior, I’ve not even mentioned his behavior.