You might want to take a look at why you choose to consider believing what Donald Trump said rather than investigating it even for a few seconds. That would have stopped you saying it "may be true". It isn't. Facts matter.
Anyone else see the story about that poor man, who appeared on tv with a hole in the sole of his shoe. I’m surprised no one has started to crowdfund him to buy a new pair. Poor Rishi. #thinkswearesostupidwewillforgethe’sminted https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/...ith-hole-in-shoe-at-north-easts-tory-hustings
In another world beating effort last month, in England: Record numbers of emergency patients waited over 12 hours to be admitted, after the decision to admit was taken, the most in any month since records began in 2010. 136,221 waited at least 4 hours to be admitted, just below the record which is 136,298. The joint worst for ambulance response times in the most urgent cases. Average time 9m35secs. For burns and strokes the average time was, wait for it, 59m07secs. FOR STROKES FFS. Target time is 18 minutes. Just 71% of patients seen within 4 hours of arrival, the worst performance on record, well below the 95% target that hasn’t been met since 2015, nationally. 25% of those having an operation cancelled are not treated within the target 28 days. Figures taken from NHS England. edit - no wonder nothing is being put forward to help solve the energy crisis, as they don’t want everyone to know that A&E is on the verge of tanking.
Just seen this on Twitter. Pretty good explanation/prediction of how we ended up here, with the NHS in shambles and government that no one wants
What is the logic here? That the aggressive attacks will be necessary when they come to light? Or is it that attacking your prosecutors isn’t a good plan? I don’t quite follow
That they shouldn't stick their necks out decrying this as a non-issue, only for it to turn out that he tried to sell the blueprints to nuclear submarines to a guy in the dining room of Mar-A-Lago for $75.
Well it was because when I posted he’d only just said it, so this fact check hadn’t been released. But again all this proves is that another federal government agency is against trump… which everyone knew anyway. I guess they’re saying that the raids are warranted? So don’t whip everyone into a frenzy because they’re justified?
Do you not think, just maybe, the most likely explanation for all Trump’s many legal troubles is that he’s bent as ****, an obvious criminal who will end up in gaol because he repeatedly breaks the law? I mean, sometimes it pays to consider the obvious thing first.
Maybe I am missing something here or Trump is genuinely stupid. If you 'stole' classified information, wouldn't you use it immediately or lose it quickly. You could digitise it, send it to some secure server or hard drive, then burn it. Why would you keep that stuff effectively in your garage ready for the FBI to pounce?
That's what you take away from this? That was just a statement of facts about how presidential records are maintained. And from that you draw the conclusion that they are a federal government agency that is "against Trump"? A clarification of factual reality is "against Trump"? Bluntly, I think you need to take a serious look at why you believe what you believe. Note, I'm not saying look at what you believe. Take a good look why. What thought processes lead you to these conclusions?
Here’s a very useful clip from CNN explaining what documentation would have been required to get a search warrant signed by a federal judge:
