EastBayRay

No I don’t think anyone seriously believes that.

Where did I claim they made the claim absolutely without qualification?

Actually they rule him out on the basis that it couldn’t have stayed there 72 hours without being found. Maybe you misunderstood quantum theory? given that it was able to come in undetected I see no reason that it could not be missed once it had passed the security checks. It’s like at the airport, nobody searches your luggage once you’ve boarded the plane no matter how long the flight. Of course nobody is silly enough to claim that he just wouldn’t do such a thing. That would be ridiculous given his history.

No. The articles backed up what I claimed. not what you claimed I claimed. big difference

It’s amusing and telling that the only reason they rule him out is the timeframe.???? not because he is clean now or wouldn’t take cocaine into the WH. I guess they want to keep things within the realms of possibility.

You seem to be confusing what I claimed personally and what I said the article claimed. deliberately, I suspect.

I didn’t say the article categorically claimed anything what I claimed is a different story. Yes there has been a consistent message that they won’t find the offender. I stand by that. in fact the same claims are in the Mail article that I linked. Search for the words ‘downplaying the chances’ if it’s too long to read .

Every company that does business in China has to comply with the Chinese government. that’s a long list of CEO’s with ‘disgusting’ political views if that is your criteria.

Where did I state “categorically claimed”?

Seems like a great way to provide all your personal information to Zuckerberg.

Well done the UK. while they have been guilty of taking fake asylum seekers for years, they are correct to give safety for these people from the thuggish Chinese regime.

I could. Or you can read it in the article. I'm not here to spoon feed the lazy.

In the New York post article that I posted.

The situation room is more secure, albeit not totally secure. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12272303/White-House-cocaine-near-Situation-Room.html the mixed reports and consistent message that they won’t be able to find the offender make me very suspicious is all. seems like they are getting their excuses in early. It’s almost like they don’t want to find the person (or persons) responsible. can’t imagine why

Crossed the line? Who gets to decide where the line is? First amendment- he can say whatever he likes. Let the voters decide. we can disagree with his opinions but he must be allowed to have them.

The claims were absolutely misleading. No doubt about that. however, it is quite possible that this was not deliberate and simply Joe misunderstanding or forgetting the numbers.

It wouldn’t surprise me if it turns out the cctv was ‘broken’ that day. Any claims that they cannot find the culprit will confirm my suspicions. also reports appearing that it was found near the situation room, not the visitor entrance. muddying the waters. Interesting… https://nypost.com/2023/07/06/cocaine-found-near-situation-room-wh-cant-rule-out-hunter/

a bit early for conspiracy theories Much appreciated

More likely “forgotten”.

I don’t think we need conspiracy theories just yet. just follow the CCTV footage it should be easy to see how it got there. funny how people get caught bringing coke onto planes but no problem getting it into the White House. More security needed. Coke today, could be cyanide tomorrow.

There is no evidence they are ALL at it.

I would say the Biden administration is ultimately responsible for security at the White House. if one or more persons are able to get drugs in there, I would say security needs looking at.

Are you suggesting some kind of conspiracy? what do you mean by “convenient “?

For who ?

My point was that its presence was of real concern. It shows a lack of security no matter who brought it in. seems that went over your head.