Tits and Cocaine at the White House

[aubaseball 2,898]

11 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

why are you looking at me nekkie for there peashooter? you sound like a perv with another goading you on. i warned you boys years ago about trump. look i know it hurts. he made you guys look like fools. serious fools. and he still is. i sleep  great at night. and yes i do have a trump tatt on me behind so trump will not have to lean over so far to kiss my ass. yall gotta do better if you are trying to get me riled. it is hard to do when so many of you are fools.go eat some capn crunch and man up dude...............

Yea, you really got us good with ole Trump.    You know everything about him….obsessed much???   I’m not.   Don’t even really like the man.   I sure get a kick out of watching you obsess over the guy.   Anyone that would go as far as you is either deranged or high as a kite.   We know you have the high part down…now it starts to blend in with derangement.    
But whatever, you do you white fifty cent.   

[AU9377 6,109]

3 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Why is the White House avoiding any cooperation in this investigation?  This should be easy.

Who says they are?  The White House isn't responsible for security or investigating breaches.  That is the job of the Secret Service.  All the nonsensical right wing faux rage aside, this is pure silliness.

[I_M4_AU 9,051]

7 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

Who says they are?  The White House isn't responsible for security or investigating breaches.  That is the job of the Secret Service.  All the nonsensical right wing faux rage aside, this is pure silliness.

The Hatch Act, really?

The White House batted away new lines of questioning Thursday about cocaine discovered at the White House – with a spokesman invoking the Hatch Act to avoid giving a direct answer to a charge leveled by Donald Trump.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12272051/White-House-refuses-rule-cocaine-belongs-Hunter-Spokesman-cites-campaign-laws.html

Oh, the transparency.  You can’t get any more transparent than this administration.  Or, go ahead and blame it on Trump.  Take your choice.

[homersapien 12,310]

19 hours ago, aubaseball said:

Again.   You don’t know what you are talking about.   I don’t care how many tours they have.  Everyone going into the west wing is cleared through somebody.   They are guest of a staffer.   So a staffer of the White House is running in circles of people that carry cocaine around with them.  
 Can you not understand English?   Regular people off the streets don’t get west wing tours.   

No one on this forum knows what they are talking about.

That's why it's called Political "Smack" Talk.

[AU9377 6,109]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

The Hatch Act, really?

The White House batted away new lines of questioning Thursday about cocaine discovered at the White House – with a spokesman invoking the Hatch Act to avoid giving a direct answer to a charge leveled by Donald Trump.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12272051/White-House-refuses-rule-cocaine-belongs-Hunter-Spokesman-cites-campaign-laws.html

Oh, the transparency.  You can’t get any more transparent than this administration.  Or, go ahead and blame it on Trump.  Take your choice.

What would you like them to say? Really.  You just want something else to crow about. 

[I_M4_AU 9,051]

Just now, AU9377 said:

What would you like them to say? Really. 

The truth about the situation.

[AU9377 6,109]

3 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The truth about the situation.

Because you know what that truth is?  It is highly unlikely that the owner will ever be identified with any certainty.  Would you rather they just publish a list of names of everyone that had access to the area so that you could accuse every one of them?  This is bizzaro world to the extreme.  Again, you don't care about who it belongs to.  You simply care to have something else to yell and scream about in the most self righteous way possible.

[I_M4_AU 9,051]

3 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Because you know what that truth is?  It is highly unlikely that the owner will ever be identified with any certainty.  Would you rather they just publish a list of names of everyone that had access to the area so that you could accuse every one of them?  This is bizzaro world to the extreme.  Again, you don't care about who it belongs to.  You simply care to have something else to yell and scream about in the most self righteous way possible.

Typical leftist; you don’t car about or don’t want to know the truth.  And notice I said situation which indicates an investigation has taken place and all avenues exhausted and then provide an update.  All we have now is avoidance which makes the White House look like they are hiding something.

[AU9377 6,109]

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Typical leftist; you don’t car about or don’t want to know the truth.  And notice I said situation which indicates an investigation has taken place and all avenues exhausted and then provide an update.  All we have now is avoidance which makes the White House look like they are hiding something.

LOL..  No.  We have what you claim is avoidance.  The Secret Service will issue a report when they have concluded their investigation into this discovery. Hounding the White House press secretary with questions that she is incapable of answering for the sole purpose of having something to be outraged over is just a show.

[DKW 86 7,946]

18 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Because you know what that truth is?  It is highly unlikely that the owner will ever be identified with any certainty.  Would you rather they just publish a list of names of everyone that had access to the area so that you could accuse every one of them?  This is bizzaro world to the extreme.  Again, you don't care about who it belongs to.  You simply care to have something else to yell and scream about in the most self righteous way possible.

What? There are likely 2 or more cameras pointed where the cocaine was found. Why would we not 100% know who did this?

And don't care what the truth is? That is rich coming from the party that is still looking for a pee tape 6 years after it was pretty much debunked.

 

Edited July 8, 2023 by DKW 86

[DKW 86 7,946]

12 hours ago, AU9377 said:

LOL..  No.  We have what you claim is avoidance.  The Secret Service will issue a report when they have concluded their investigation into this discovery. Hounding the White House press secretary with questions that she is incapable of answering for the sole purpose of having something to be outraged over is just a show.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders says hi...

[AU9377 6,109]

10 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

What? There are likely 2 or more cameras pointed where the cocaine was found. Why would we not 100% know who did this?

And don't care what the truth is? That is rich coming from the party that is still looking for a pee tape 6 years after it was pretty much debunked.

 

The size of that baggy is so small that it could literally be impossible to see it drop from a hand or the back of a phone.  You can see everyone that placed something in that place, but you can't prove who dropped it, unless you get lucky and get a fingerprint on the baggy itself.  The point is that we just don't know.

There is no party involved in this.  The Secret Service secures the White House.  It isn't always a boogey man in the dark corner pulling strings.

[AU9377 6,109]

10 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Sarah Huckabee Sanders says hi...

When was Sanders asked about something like this? 

[Mikey 16,781]

On 7/5/2023 at 3:22 PM, AU9377 said:

The top picture is otherwise known as a "dime bag"..... A small bag containing drugs.  The bottom bag is a ziplock bag.  I can't help but laugh when news outlets report that a ziplock type bag of cocaine was found.

 

I have been on this board for many years now. Congratulations! You have made the silliest post I've ever seen here and I've seen a LOT of posts. Trying to claim that one of the above bags is not a "zip lock type" bag is asinine. And trying to make any difference in the bags an important fact is even more silly. Really grabbing at straws, weren't you?

[AU9377 6,109]

1 hour ago, Mikey said:

I have been on this board for many years now. Congratulations! You have made the silliest post I've ever seen here and I've seen a LOT of posts. Trying to claim that one of the above bags is not a "zip lock type" bag is asinine. And trying to make any difference in the bags an important fact is even more silly. Really grabbing at straws, weren't you?

Not at all.  THE POINT is that when you read or hear that a ziplock bag containing coke was found, you should realize that what they are speaking of or writing about is something that could lay flat in the palm of your hand.  In fact a couple of them would lay flat in the palm of your hand.  That is how small of an object we are discussing.  Therefore, you have to consider that when you wonder why the item wasn't discovered prior to entry or why it may not have been picked up on cameras after.

[homersapien 12,310]

7 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

And don't care what the truth is? That is rich coming from the party that is still looking for a pee tape 6 years after it was pretty much debunked.

 

Speaking of "truth", can you support this?

[DKW 86 7,946]

8 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The size of that baggy is so small that it could literally be impossible to see it drop from a hand or the back of a phone.  You can see everyone that placed something in that place, but you can't prove who dropped it, unless you get lucky and get a fingerprint on the baggy itself.  The point is that we just don't know.\

So a video showing someone dropping the bag is not good enough for you?

Seems simple enough to me.

[DKW 86 7,946]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Speaking of "truth", can you support this?

6 years worth of facts or in your case lack thereof....

[DKW 86 7,946]

On 7/8/2023 at 9:10 AM, AU9377 said:

Not at all.  THE POINT is that when you read or hear that a ziplock bag containing coke was found, you should realize that what they are speaking of or writing about is something that could lay flat in the palm of your hand.  In fact a couple of them would lay flat in the palm of your hand.  That is how small of an object we are discussing.  Therefore, you have to consider that when you wonder why the item wasn't discovered prior to entry or why it may not have been picked up on cameras after.

The point is whose hand went into that particular cubby...that is all. No baggy at all.

This is the most secure building in the nation. If we don't have video tape of it, we need a new SS Staff.

Edited July 10, 2023 by DKW 86

[homersapien 12,310]

20 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

6 years worth of facts or in your case lack thereof....

I didn't  think so.

No one is looking for a "pee tape".  Just admit it was purely rhetorical.

Edited July 9, 2023 by homersapien

[AU9377 6,109]

21 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

So a video showing someone dropping the bag is not good enough for you?

Seems simple enough to me.

If that exists......It most likely doesn't. At most, you can compile a list of everyone that was at that spot. From there, it depends on how interested the Secret Service is in the matter.  They can't charge someone without a lot more evidence than a particular person was one of how ever many.........  Even if there was only one person on tape that placed something into the cubby, there are problems with the chain of evidence and the fact that it wasn't found on their person.   We will just have to wait and see what they conclude.  Regardless of what they conclude, some will act as though there is a conspiracy afoot.  That is par for the course regardless of the issue.

[AUFAN78 4,162]

3 hours ago, AU9377 said:

it depends on how interested the Secret Service is in the matter

I think you just admitted what many people have already concluded. Well done!

[KansasTiger 3,280]

I think too many people are trusting this new reported location is accurate. I dont think it was found in the west wing at all. When hazmat was called they were called to the east wing. I've heard the audio I just dont have a link. I think this was found in the library where we originally heard, and where there might not be as many cameras. Thus making it harder to ID because A) they'd have to admit they lied, b) they don't have as many cameras, C) they can't blame it on a random person on a tour.

Also after reading this thread (lets face it, we knew this before this thread), I can confidently say @AU9377 might be the most brainwashed party schill I've ever seen. That is all.

Edited July 9, 2023 by KansasTiger

[AU9377 6,109]

2 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I think you just admitted what many people have already concluded. Well done!

You seem to think that their interest is totally dependent on executive branch direction.  That is where we differ.  It is just as feasible that they don't consider this to be some monumental security breach that must be solved.  If they watch the right wing mouth pieces, they will fear that the nation's future is dependent on who did it.... lol

[AU9377 6,109]

1 hour ago, KansasTiger said:

I think too many people are trusting this new reported location is accurate. I dont think it was found in the west wing at all. When hazmat was called they were called to the east wing. I've heard the audio I just dont have a link. I think this was found in the library where we originally heard, and where there might not be as many cameras. Thus making it harder to ID because A) they'd have to admit they lied, b) they don't have as many cameras, C) they can't blame it on a random person on a tour.

Also after reading this thread (lets face it, we knew this before this thread), I can confidently say @AU9377 might be the most brainwashed party schill I've ever seen. That is all.

I simply don't follow every baseless conspiracy fueled nonsensical narrative that gets thrown out there by Fox and their apostles.......  I am very much to the right of center and I don't vote party lines.  I also have a habit of discarding what doesn't matter in favor of what is important.