Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You have made primary assertions with no evidence, yet you expect rebuttal to be evidenced?And when you are given evidence by others you indicate think that is false information or fake news or whatever. I bet you will call the evidence gave you by Marener USELESS.
You know nothing about records classification, etc. On Ignore.
You don't offer evidence of your assertions. Do that, and we can talk, otherwise you are just an empty balloon.So as I've offered before, tell me what you disagree with. You still don't get that, huh?
No one asked (or if they did I missed it).
The testimony is here. You should read the entire thing. 80 instances of classified material is on page 13. Talking about travel binders is on page 68.
You don't offer evidence of your assertions. Do that, and we can talk, otherwise you are just an empty balloon.
The fact they were called 80 times about documents demonstrates it’s not uncommon for congress members to have classified documents in error. I doubt you are going to accuse 80 members of Congress of stuffing documents in their pants.So I read page 30, there was a reference to "80" times they were called to look at documents. So the fuck what? What does that establish. Again, can't dazzle, baffle ...
So you demonstrate cognitive bias when provided evidence. Poser. Ignore him.
You don't offer evidence of your assertions
The fact they were called 80 times about documents demonstrates it’s not uncommon for congress members to have classified documents in error. I doubt you are going to accuse 80 members of Congress of stuffing documents in their pants.
Page 68 says the biggest reason those documents are misplaced. It’s during trips. It’s not because they’re all shoving documents in their pants as they walk out of SCIFs. It shows that members of congress engage with classified documents outside of SCIFs.
This isn’t that hard to understand. You just need to have an open mind instead of believing (mistakenly) that you know everything.
WTF are you talking about? I despise Trump!That's a reflection on how much everyday people DESPISE the lying media. At one time, people trusted the media to the tune of about 70%
Today.. ha ha.. it's more like 20%
The worst evidence is no evidence.So you believe he was actually called exactly 80 times with the same question? He wasn't approximating or exaggerating, all the calls were for the same thing, and he still didn't say how they did get them out. Worst evidence ever
The worst evidence is no evidence.
You asked for a link and I provided. Here’s another about the same issue:
Loading…
www.washingtonpost.com
He said at least 80 times. So he’s approximating but I doubt he’s exaggerating. Your attempt to split hairs is pretty weak.
The calls were about classified material being in the personal papers of various government officials. That’s clearly stated.
The FBI sends someone to pick up the material. That’s hardly relevant but that’s stated in the WaPo article.
The point you’re trying to avoid is that management of classified material isn’t nearly as strict as you make it out to be.
My standard is that I back up what I say and I did so with credible links upon request.I told you to pick a standard and DO IT before you applied it to me. I'm tired of your bull shit. Goodbye
Your assertions reasserting your assertions are more assertions not evidence.Actually I did. I said to tell me what you think is wrong, you couldn't do that. You just wanted me to go around and prove everything. I asked you to do that first and you passed. Now you're just being a petty bitch demanding I do it while you still refuse to.
I'm about to put you on ignore if you don't go anywhere. Start with rules for me that you will follow for yourself or go away. If you don't pick one of those and your double standards continue, then I will help you go away by putting you on ignore. Your choice.
Word
Your assertions reasserting your assertions are more assertions not evidence.
Your opinions are meaningless. Move along. Ignore me. You will feel better.
You mean demokkkrats.He couldn't lock her up because the Rethugikkkons, after 30 years of investigating the Clinton's can come up with nothing.
MAGA
Talking above your intelligence againYour assertions reasserting your assertions are more assertions not evidence.
Your opinions are meaningless. Move along. Ignore me. You will feel better.
Dumbass I've had the training as all those who have handled classified documents and materialYou on the other hand claim to know things that you clearly don’t.
That’s a very different problem.
You mean demokkkrats.
DemokkkratsNope, not enough evidence for sure, oh and tRump and his administration are incompetent books.
MAGA
