Trump lashes out at Biden family, media after cocaine found at White House

[Isaan sailor]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

That doesn't say what you claimed it meant:

"Some officials have cautioned that the culprit is unlikely to be conclusively identified due to the sheer number of people who pass through the area on a regular basis."  does not mean that there's a "consistent message that they won’t be able to find the offender"

It’s not a train station.  It’s a secured access area in one of the most secured buildings in America.  They shouldn’t miss anything.

[Hanaguma]

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Why should they take seriously Trump's B.S. claim?

Not just Trump's claim. It isn't so easy to deflect.  Care to take a stab at answering?

1. How did the coke magically tour the WHite House before ending up where it did?

2. Why can't the spokesholes for the First Family simply declare, "It wasn't the Bidens'"?

[candide]

20 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Not just Trump's claim. It isn't so easy to deflect.  Care to take a stab at answering?

1. How did the coke magically tour the WHite House before ending up where it did?

2. Why can't the spokesholes for the First Family simply declare, "It wasn't the Bidens'"?

We are talking about this, right?

"Does anybody really believe that the COCAINE found in the West Wing of the White House, very close to the Oval Office, is for the use of anyone other than Hunter & Joe Biden,”

 So, according to you, when Trump (or anyone else) makes such a B.S. claim, the Presidency should reply rather than ignore the creep? Really?

Edited July 7, 2023 by candide

[sirineou]

49 minutes ago, EastBayRay said:

No I don’t think anyone seriously believes that.

And your reasons why?

[EastBayRay]

Just now, sirineou said:

And your reasons why?

Because such a conspiracy theory is ridiculous by even the most ardent of tin foil hatters.

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, EastBayRay said:

Because such a conspiracy theory is ridiculous by even the most ardent of tin foil hatters.

That is sertaily your opinion, Would you care to share the reasoning that led you to that opinion?

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, EastBayRay said:

Because such a conspiracy theory is ridiculous by even the most ardent of tin foil hatters.

Almost as ridiculous as Trump's statement?

[Jingthing]

55 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Not just Trump's claim. It isn't so easy to deflect.  Care to take a stab at answering?

1. How did the coke magically tour the WHite House before ending up where it did?

2. Why can't the spokesholes for the First Family simply declare, "It wasn't the Bidens'"?

Because that would dignify the absurd assertion that it was.

[proton]

4 hours ago, PremiumLane said:

It is like Hunter is the alpha all these conservative clowns wish that they could be

I don't think many conservatives want to leave their laptop about with porn on, do dodgy deals with China, use prostitutes or film themselves speeding while smoking a crack pipe. Some people would rather obey the law and live a decent life. Anyone with decent morals would not want to be alpha Hunter, conservative or not.

[Hanaguma]

Now MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell is being even more precise about the location of the coke, and her characterization of the area;

 

"It was found, by my observation, at a much more secure place, limited access place in than the West Wing reception area," Mitchell said. "It's still a publicly traffic - a frequently trafficked place, but it's down near the Situation Room right off West Executive down below. And normal people, average people just can't get in there, even with the entry for the Northwest Gate." 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-host-scrutinizes-wh-cocaine-found-near-situation-room

[Jingthing]

23 minutes ago, proton said:

I don't think many conservatives want to leave their laptop about with porn on, do dodgy deals with China, use prostitutes or film themselves speeding while smoking a crack pipe. Some people would rather obey the law and live a decent life. Anyone with decent morals would not want to be alpha Hunter, conservative or not.

Decent morals?

 

That rules Trump out.

 

The last I heard Hunter is not an elected official and not running to be one either. 

[scottiejohn]

I have just cast my first stone!

Trump needs to shut up (I know - impossible) so why can he not go and live with his best buddy Putin and leave the US and the rest of the western world at peace!

Edited July 7, 2023 by Pink Mist
Replied to post removed

[scottiejohn]

28 minutes ago, proton said:

I don't think many conservatives want to leave their laptop about with porn on, do dodgy deals with China, use prostitutes or film themselves speeding while smoking a crack pipe. Some people would rather obey the law and live a decent life. Anyone with decent morals would not want to be alpha Hunter, conservative or not.

I think you meant;

"I don't think many conservatives want to leave their laptop about with porn on, do dodgy deals with China, use prostitutes or film themselves speeding while smoking a crack pipe.

[EastBayRay]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

That is sertaily your opinion, Would you care to share the reasoning that led you to that opinion?

You think that a republican is going to sneak cocaine into the White House, then leave it there in the hope that he isn’t caught on the way in, cctv doesn’t spot him and then everyone blames it on Hunter Biden?  ????

 

sorry bud, even by conspiracy theorists standards that is way out there.

 

 

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

I have just cast my first stone!

Trump needs to shut up (I know - impossible) so why can he not go and live with his best buddy Putin and leave the US and the rest of the western world at peace!

You've really never said -- nice smelling shampoo?

[EastBayRay]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

Almost as ridiculous as Trump's statement?

Given Hunter’s long history with drugs, I would say Trumps theory is more plausible.

 

the whole “it must have been a republican who sneaked it in there” reeks of desperation. Comical in fact.

 

but that’s just my opinion. 

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Isaan sailor said:

It’s not a train station.  It’s a secured access area in one of the most secured buildings in America.  They shouldn’t miss anything.

Are there cameras in the storage room? If someone removes something from their pocket and drops it on the floor or places it on a shelf in that room would it be detected? There's a big difference between "shouldn't" and "didn't".

[Eleftheros]

At this point, the presence of powerful narcotic stimulants in the White House can only be a major positive influence on decision-making.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, EastBayRay said:

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

Here's how you characterized what you said:  

"consistent message that they won’t be able to find the offender make me very suspicious is all. 

That is an absolute characterization of their statements  that they won't be able to find the offender.  However, they didn't say that. What they said was that the probably won't be able which is not absolute but expresses a degree of uncertainty.

You think expressions of probability don't count?

Let's try this example.

If I tell someone I'm going to the store later to pick up something for them, then if I don't go, they can fairly reproach me for not doing what I said.

But if I say I'm probably going to the store, then it's not an absolute statement. Is it? So the reproach doesn't have the same degree of justification.

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, EastBayRay said:

I said it was a consistent message. Not made absolutely without qualification those are your words not mine.

 

here is another one. it’s in the headline this time so you should be able to find it

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/05/white-house-cocaine-culprit-unlikely-to-be-found-law-enforcement-official-00104742

 

thats 3 articles saying the same thing. I am sure you know the meaning of consistent.

 

PS I i believe discussing the mods decisions is against forum rules so I shall refrain as you should in future 

 

 

Yes they have a consistent message. I'm not challenging that it was consistent. I'm challenging that it was expressed as a certainty. The way you characterized their stance; 

"consistent message that they won’t be able to find the offender make me very suspicious is all." leaves out the uncertainty. Had you written "consistent message that they probably won’t be able to find the offender make me very suspicious is all." that would have been unobjectionable.

 

Edited July 7, 2023 by Rimmer

[candide]

33 minutes ago, EastBayRay said:

You think that a republican is going to sneak cocaine into the White House, then leave it there in the hope that he isn’t caught on the way in, cctv doesn’t spot him and then everyone blames it on Hunter Biden?  ????

 

sorry bud, even by conspiracy theorists standards that is way out there.

 

 

Not a wise Republican, but a dumb MAGA fan, and there are many of them. Ex. Who would have thought someone would be dumb enough to wait outside Obama's house to get him?

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Not just Trump's claim. It isn't so easy to deflect.  Care to take a stab at answering?

1. How did the coke magically tour the WHite House before ending up where it did?

 

Do you understand that people deposit their stuff  in the storage area before they tour the White House? What do you think happens after the tour? People put their stuff in the storage room and just hang out? 

[Hanaguma]

9 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Do you understand that people deposit their stuff  in the storage area before they tour the White House? What do you think happens after the tour? People put their stuff in the storage room and just hang out? 

According to noted journalist Andrea Mitchell, it is not that kind of area.  Not for the general public at all.  Certain visitors yes, but not group tours of sweaty Germans grunting in guttural savage tones. 

[sirineou]

25 minutes ago, EastBayRay said:

You think that a republican is going to sneak cocaine into the White House, then leave it there in the hope that he isn’t caught on the way in, cctv doesn’t spot him and then everyone blames it on Hunter Biden?  ????

 

sorry bud, even by conspiracy theorists standards that is way out there.

 

 

A lot more plausible than   Hunter biden bringing cocaine in the White house but not finding a better place to hide it, he hides it at a heavily trafficked entrance cubby hole where visitors place electronics and other belongings before going on tours,. 

   Do you know why Roger Stone is called the master of the political dirty trick

Or why Nixon had to resign?

But dumping a bit of cocaine  at a heavily trafficked entrance cubby hole where visitors place electronics and other belongings would be something they will never do because ... well because it's not nice ????

 

IMO most likely a  visitor found it in his/hers pocket while taking out electronics, and ditched it .

But I would not put it beyond the republicans to  do something like that  to deflect the news cycle from ,, well you know all the other positive news about the republicans. . 

 

 

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Hanaguma said:

According to noted journalist Andrea Mitchell, it is not that kind of area.  Not for the general public at all.  Certain visitors yes, but not group tours of sweaty Germans grunting in guttural savage tones. 

What do you think Andrew Mitchell's statement, if true, proves? Does that make it the kind of area where people leave their stuff upon exiting the secure areas of the White House? 

[scottiejohn]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

You've really never said -- nice smelling shampoo?

Oops!  I did not read/see the word "hair" in the post I referred to!

I thought you were referring to a certain substance that I object to!

[Hummin]

The question is, do Trump have the right to claim anything regarding the finding of coke in the White house, and name names? 

 

We all know how much we want to believe something or not, as long it fits our belief, be the truth or not! 

 

Someone seen the Dutch tv program or any of the spin offs around the world? How they manipulate themselves to think they know the truth, and who is the real traitors? Fantastic entertaining og a program to learn something from. 

 

We are all easy to be manipulated, thats why most should wait and see what comes next instead of be so sure about anyting. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Traitors_(British_TV_series)

 

 

[EastBayRay]

2 hours ago, candide said:

Not a wise Republican, but a dumb MAGA fan, and there are many of them. Ex. Who would have thought someone would be dumb enough to wait outside Obama's house to get him?

But getting Obama was a definitive result.

 

planting coke in the hope people blamed it on Hunter is pie in the sky. Conspiracy nonsense, tin foil hat stuff IMO. Desperate stuff

[EastBayRay]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

Here's how you characterized what you said:  

"consistent message that they won’t be able to find the offender make me very suspicious is all. 

That is an absolute characterization of their statements  that they won't be able to find the offender.  However, they didn't say that. What they said was that the probably won't be able which is not absolute but expresses a degree of uncertainty.

You think expressions of probability don't count?

Let's try this example.

If I tell someone I'm going to the store later to pick up something for them, then if I don't go, they can fairly reproach me for not doing what I said.

But if I say I'm probably going to the store, then it's not an absolute statement. Is it? So the reproach doesn't have the same degree of justification.

It is a consistent message that makes me suspicious. 
 

I stand by my statement (but not the statements that you made on my behalf).

 

they would never say they definitely cannot find the offender so soon after the event. That would give the game away. Better to suggest the possibility before they announce that they were unable to find them.

[Isaan sailor]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Are there cameras in the storage room? If someone removes something from their pocket and drops it on the floor or places it on a shelf in that room would it be detected? There's a big difference between "shouldn't" and "didn't".

I agree it could have gone undetected in the most secure building in America—if not the world.  But family members get a pass in the WH, and I think that should change immediately.