It's not false to say say they could have planted evidence.
True, but is is innuendo and intentionally sewing suspicion with the weak minded followers.
It's not false to say say they could have planted evidence.
Doesn't apply to the POTUS, he is the final say on classification status.
Chuck Rosenberg:
It might, but here's why I don't think it will in the end make a difference, Geoff.
The president of the United States, any president, is the primary consumer of intelligence information. He is the ultimate customer. He also has the authority to classify and declassify documents. So, even if documents were found that are classified, it would be very difficult, exceedingly difficult, for a federal prosecutor to prove that Mr. Trump or any other president didn't just wave their hand over the documents and say, I now declassify you.
In order to prove a criminal case of mishandling or retaining classified information, you would also have to essentially prove a negative, that that didn't happen, that the documents were properly classified, and that President Trump took the documents in a classified condition, he mishandled them, and retained them.
That's a very difficult criminal case, given that the president has ultimate classification and declassification authority.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-trump-may-have-violated-the-presidential-records-act
And I have no reason to doubt you are in Atlanta but I have no way to know it's accurate either.
So in order for someone to be an "average American" they must have ______ education and _____ wage, and that's it?
So what are the "______", then?
What hypocrisy?
Exactly, because it's inconsequential to the arguments I'm making...I don't need to rely on a crutch like a personal anecdote clouded by inherent bias. I can just make an argument and use my sources without putting myself into the argument.
That's the major difference between myself and most people on JPP; I avoid posting personal anecdotes and given circumstances because I don't see the point of making a debate about myself.
Doesn't apply to the POTUS, he is the final say on classification status.
You suggested I wasnt an average American because I didn't vote with the majority for Biden.
I'm saying that the census says 88% of Americans have at least a HS diploma or GED and the average American make $94,000 a year. On those two dimensions I'm average. On others probably not.
I'm not going to play your HS level 20 questions again, dipshit. The fact remains you support an autocrat overthrowing the US and our Constitution.
The good news is that I doubt you have the spine like some on JPP to go out one day and start murdering blacks, gays and liberals.
I don't understand that question.
Well you're quite literally not the average American if you didn't vote for Biden.
OK, so you're not an "average American", you're average when it comes to two things.
So who decided that those two things are what can determine who is an average American and who is not?
You answered the question, you said HS diploma and $94K a year.
Ok so what? Any post you make with out a source is suspect. That's all.
Well you're quite literally not the average American if you didn't vote for Biden.
OK, so you're not an "average American", you're average when it comes to two things.
So who decided that those two things are what can determine who is an average American and who is not?
Well then it's a good thing I always source my posts when debating.
I wasn't in the majority that's right but that's not the same as average.
And I already said that on any one dimensional scale anyone if us could be consider outside the average.
I bet it's not always.
I'm not so sure about that in the context of democracy.
OK, fair enough...but one question; would that mean that calling yourself an "average American" is sophist?
No, it is...I post links and quotes all the time when debating actual topics and subjects.
Democracy is irrelevant. Majority and average aren't the same thing.