OK . Who's cocaine is it???

[BobDole]

8 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

To be fair and for the sake of full context, she didn’t just say “that’s an irresponsible thing to ask” and then leave it at that. 
 

She said that there has been some very irresponsible reporting, then went on to say how she’s been very clear for the last two days answering about it, and then went on to be very clear that the Biden’s were not at the White House when it was found. 
 

Again, just so we know all that was said instead of just a few words. 

Let's not let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

[Paul158]

6 minutes ago, BobDole said:

Oh so now she doesn't want to lie, that's the line you want to use? You wouldn't believe her if she said the sky was blue. You don't believe anything coming from a Biden or democrat and that didn't change once Jean-Pierre commented on the coke in the White House.

Bob are you ok? MSpart is a reasonable guy with common sense. He obviously doesn't share your political views but he  seems pretty fair in his assessments of people with different viewpoints.   

[mspart]

15 minutes ago, BobDole said:

Oh so now she doesn't want to lie, that's the line you want to use? You wouldn't believe her if she said the sky was blue. You don't believe anything coming from a Biden or democrat and that didn't change once Jean-Pierre commented on the coke in the White House.

Well, that is your opinion Bob.   I have to say I don't subscribe to it.  Your opinion is nothing more than a caricature.  But you are welcome to it.  Live in your little bubble. 

At least you know I answered your question directly, unlike the press secretary.  But even with my answer, you disregarded it much like you judge of me.   Projection seems a logical conclusion. 

mspart

[BobDole]

2 hours ago, mspart said:

Well, that is your opinion Bob.   I have to say I don't subscribe to it.  Your opinion is nothing more than a caricature.  But you are welcome to it.  Live in your little bubble. 

At least you know I answered your question directly, unlike the press secretary.  But even with my answer, you disregarded it much like you judge of me.   Projection seems a logical conclusion. 

mspart

Watch the video, she didn't say what you originally claimed. But who cares about facts, you have never let them hinder your opinion.

[Offthemat]

3 hours ago, BobDole said:

Watch the video, she didn't say what you originally claimed. But who cares about facts, you have never let them hinder your opinion.

mspart said “she said that was an irresponsible question to ask.”

She said “it’s irresponsible of you to ask that question.”

What’s the difference?

[GreatWhiteNorth]

3 hours ago, Offthemat said:

mspart said “she said that was an irresponsible question to ask.”

She said “it’s irresponsible of you to ask that question.”

What’s the difference?

Mainly that... they are different, and they communicate very different things.

Based on my 9th grade English class (thanks Mrs. Lindsey), I am able to ascertain the difference.

1. mspart said “she said that was an irresponsible question to ask.”
2. She said “it’s irresponsible of you to ask that question.”

I'll give you a giant hint - "what" was irresponsible in the 1st, and "who" was irresponsible in the 2nd.

[Offthemat]

16 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Mainly that... they are different, and they communicate very different things.

Based on my 9th grade English class (thanks Mrs. Lindsey), I am able to ascertain the difference.

1. mspart said “she said that was an irresponsible question to ask.”
2. She said “it’s irresponsible of you to ask that question.”

I'll give you a giant hint - "what" was irresponsible in the 1st, and "who" was irresponsible in the 2nd.

They don’t communicate anything different at all.  It’s the same person asking the same question in both cases and not getting an answer in either.  

[GreatWhiteNorth]

4 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

They don’t communicate anything different at all.  It’s the same person asking the same question in both cases and not getting an answer in either.  

Did you miss my "giant hint" in my post?

[Offthemat]

2 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Did you miss my "giant hint" in my post?

I found it to be of no value.  

[GreatWhiteNorth]

6 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

I found it to be of no value.  

Sounds about right.

[Offthemat]

8 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Sounds about right.

It is right. 

[BobDole]

5 hours ago, Offthemat said:

mspart said “she said that was an irresponsible question to ask.”

She said “it’s irresponsible of you to ask that question.”

What’s the difference?

She said that in reference to it being asked multiple times over the previous days along with mentioning to read the transcripts. Maybe she's a little perturbed at being asked the same thing she has explained multiple times, but who knows. So she is correct in that it's irresponsible reporting if you keep asking the same question over and over hoping for a new answer.

[WrestlingRasta]

8 hours ago, Offthemat said:

mspart said “she said that was an irresponsible question to ask.”

She said “it’s irresponsible of you to ask that question.”

What’s the difference?

The biggest difference is what mspart left out of her statement….which was that she had been answering this ad nausea for the last couple of days and then clearly stated, again, that the Biden’s were not at the White House the day it was found nor the day before. She did mistakenly say they weren’t there two days before when that was in fact the day they left. Mspart continued to push that she left the question unanswered, which she in fact did answer by saying they were not even there. 
 

In one way it’s kinda surprising he didn’t have the whole statement copy and pasted, but then again one can clearly see why he wouldn’t want to copy and paste the whole statement on this one  

 

 

[Offthemat]

She’ll likely be asked again.  What she said was unresponsive to the question she was asked, no matter how irresponsible she considers it to reframe the question she didn’t answer.  The longer it takes to respond to the question the more people are convinced it was Hunter’s. 

[WrestlingRasta]

7 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

She’ll likely be asked again.  What she said was unresponsive to the question she was asked, no matter how irresponsible she considers it to reframe the question she didn’t answer.  The longer it takes to respond to the question the more people are convinced it was Hunter’s. 

It was not unresponsive. It was just not responded to in the manner a certain segment of the population has decided she needs to respond. 
 

Stating, once again during the specific briefing in question, they were not on the property the day of or the day before is not only not unresponsive, it’s very direct.  It’s beyond the aspect of ‘no he didn’t drop it’ with the added element of ‘he wasn’t even here’. 

[BobDole]

16 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

She’ll likely be asked again.  What she said was unresponsive to the question she was asked, no matter how irresponsible she considers it to reframe the question she didn’t answer.  The longer it takes to respond to the question the more people are convinced it was Hunter’s. 

She didn't give the answer certain people wanted to hear, that's the crutch of it. Doing my best mspart impression, here is a copy and paste of the transcript.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2023/07/07/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-national-security-advisor-jake-sullivan-5/

Q    Hi.  I’m wondering if you have any comments about recent crime in D.C.  It’s raising rates.  We’ve lost an SIV applicant from Afghanistan in the most recent killings.  Really tragic.  Wondering what the White House has to say about that.
 
And then, secondly, sorry to bring up cocaine again.  (Laughter.)  But there was a question yesterday during press gaggle with Andrew Bates that was — I guess — he said that it had — he didn’t — he was avoiding it because of the Hatch Act. 
 
I’m just asking again: Can you just say once and for all whether or not the cocaine belonged to the Biden family?  (Laughter.)
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, a couple of things there.  He mentioned the Hatch Act because the question was posed to him in the Donald —
 
Q    Yes.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — using Donald Trump.  And so, he was trying to be very mindful. 
 
Q    Yeah.  I didn’t do that, so —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay, I hear you.  But you’re asking me a question, so I’m answering it for you.  And so, that’s why he said the Hatch Act.  So I would — I would, you know, have you read the transcript and read the transcript fully so you can see exactly what he was trying to say.  So, that’s number one. 
 
So we’re not avoiding the question; that is not true.  We’ve answered this question, litigated this question for the last two days exhaustively. 
 
You know, there has been some irresponsible reporting about the family, and — and so I got to call that out here.  And I have been very clear.  I was clear two days ago when talking about this over and over again, as I was being asked a question.
 
As you know — and the media outlets reported this — the Biden family was not here.  They were not here.  They were at Camp David.  They were not here Friday.  They were not here Saturday.  They were not here Sunday.  They were not even here Monday. 
They came back on Tuesday.  So to ask that question is actually incredibly irresponsible.  And — and I’ll just leave it there. 

[DJT]

I doubt it was Hunter’s, but that was not a straight answer to the question asked. The question was whether the coke belonged to someone in the Biden family, not whether the Biden family was at the White House when it was found…

A drug house is raided, but the dealer isn’t home at the time of the raid. The dealer is later arrested and questioned.

Cop: “Are the drugs we found yours?”
Dealer: “I wasn’t even home!”
Cop: “You’re right. My apologies. You’re free to go.”

[WrestlingRasta]

1 minute ago, DJT said:

I doubt it was Hunter’s, but that was not a straight answer to the question asked. The question was whether the coke belonged to someone in the Biden family, not whether the Biden family was at the White House when it was found…

A drug house is raided, but the dealer isn’t home at the time of the raid. The dealer is later arrested and questioned.

Cop: “Are the drugs we found yours?”
Dealer: “I wasn’t even home!”
Cop: “You’re right. My apologies. You’re free to go.”

I perfect example of why, when you have been answering a question ad nauseam for the past few days, you answer in the way she did. Because no matter what you say, the only correct answer to a certain segment of people is the answer they want to hear. It’s okay, it’s not particular to this administration. Same thing happened 16-20, 08-16, and so on. 

Your analogy doesn’t play at all. A bag of coke doesn’t go unoticed for two days in the White House. I don’t think your dealer’s home has that kind of security.  

[BobDole]

8 minutes ago, DJT said:

I doubt it was Hunter’s, but that was not a straight answer to the question asked. The question was whether the coke belonged to someone in the Biden family, not whether the Biden family was at the White House when it was found…

A drug house is raided, but the dealer isn’t home at the time of the raid. The dealer is later arrested and questioned.

Cop: “Are the drugs we found yours?”
Dealer: “I wasn’t even home!”
Cop: “You’re right. My apologies. You’re free to go.”

She's not the head of the investigation team, nor in charge of the investigation. Asking for her to name names is absolutely ridiculous in an ongoing investigation. Do you HONESTLY expect her to say, "well we've narrowed it down to these three people?"

Even if she is privy to the information I'd venture to say she's not allowed to comment in much detail and much more importantly not name the suspects. I know it is hard for some people to read between the lines when people on the "other side" are speaking, but she's all but saying that is didn't belong to a Biden family member. 

Your analogy is weak, but I'll give you a D for trying to say the White House should just be called a crack house now. Is Jill now a crackwhore?

[Paul158]

5 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I perfect example of why, when you have been answering a question ad nauseam for the past few days, you answer in the way she did. Because no matter what you say, the only correct answer to a certain segment of people is the answer they want to hear. It’s okay, it’s not particular to this administration. Same thing happened 16-20, 08-16, and so on. 

Your analogy doesn’t play at all. A bag of coke doesn’t go unoticed for two days in the White House. I don’t think your dealer’s home has that kind of security.  

OK. The bottom line is we don't know when it was put there. There is a possibility that know one investigating this knows when it was put there. So it doesn't matter when the Bidens were there does it? We only know when it was found.

[DJT]

Just now, WrestlingRasta said:

I perfect example of why, when you have been answering a question ad nauseam for the past few days, you answer in the way she did. Because no matter what you say, the only correct answer to a certain segment of people is the answer they want to hear. It’s okay, it’s not particular to this administration. Same thing happened 16-20, 08-16, and so on. 

Your analogy doesn’t play at all. A bag of coke doesn’t go unoticed for two days in the White House. I don’t think your dealer’s home has that kind of security.  

You think a bag of coke laying around in a drug house would go unnoticed for a couple days?

And you’re right, the White House security and the intelligence capabilities at their disposal are next level. There is no way they don’t know exactly whose it was. You think if it was a bag of anthrax they wouldn’t have had the person in custody in a matter of an hour? It’s the appearance of secrecy that has made a non-story into a scandalous tale.

[BobDole]

6 minutes ago, DJT said:

You think a bag of coke laying around in a drug house would go unnoticed for a couple days?

And you’re right, the White House security and the intelligence capabilities at their disposal are next level. There is no way they don’t know exactly whose it was. You think if it was a bag of anthrax they wouldn’t have had the person in custody in a matter of an hour? It’s the appearance of secrecy that has made a non-story into a scandalous tale.

No matter who is charged with this horrendous crime the conspiracy nuts will still put out YouTube videos saying they have evidence it was Hunter or even Jill. No answer will suffice for you and the rest of the tin foil hat brigade.

[DJT]

6 minutes ago, BobDole said:

Your analogy is weak, but I'll give you a D for trying to say the White House should just be called a crack house now. Is Jill now a crackwhore?

It’s Dr. Crackwhore… Show some respect.

Also, I don’t think they cut KJP in on much information about anything given her answers to most questions. I mean, it’s her job to relay information to the public, so if you want to keep the public in the dark, just don’t tell her much. The Biden administration has failed to deliver on the promise to be “the most transparent ever”.

[DJT]

2 minutes ago, BobDole said:

No matter who is charged with this horrendous crime the conspiracy nuts will still put out YouTube videos saying they have evidence it was Hunter or even Jill. No answer will suffice for you and the rest of the tin foil hat brigade.

Wrong. YouTube will delete them. 
 

There shouldn’t have been the time allowed for any conspiracy to take hold. It should’ve been a quick story on the same day it was found, “________ (secret service agent, senator, random dude, etc.) arrested after dropping bag of cocaine in the White House,” paired with a mugshot. Done.

[Offthemat]

2 minutes ago, DJT said:

Wrong. YouTube will delete them. 
 

There shouldn’t have been the time allowed for any conspiracy to take hold. It should’ve been a quick story on the same day it was found, “________ (secret service agent, senator, random dude, etc.) arrested after dropping bag of cocaine in the White House,” paired with a mugshot. Done.

Naw, Hunter has diplomatic immunity.