Who brought the coke to the WH?

[Anonymous]

It is interesting to see the attitudes expressed on here. Let's be honest. If this was still Turnip's WH, it'd be national wall to wall 24/7 media coverage and massive speculation as to which Turnip kid it was. And endless talk show talk about what a threat this is to national security and a massive failure on the part of an abysmal administration and another evidence of how deeply morally bankrupt it was. And I admit this as someone who despises Turnip.

Of course it matters. And of course the powers that be have a pretty good idea who the coke belonged to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No evidence that there were hundreds of people there over the weekend.

No evidence it was Hunter... who wasn't even there over the weekend.

True, but we have no idea how long it was there before it was found.

You're right about one thing: "we have no idea." None of us do.

Well, we have some idea. The name of everyone who has been in that area is on a list.

No, "we" don't have "some idea"--only the LE officials and others involved in the investigation have some idea. And even if they know exactly who brought it in, is it our right as citizens to know who did it? If someone were caught with drugs in your place of employment, should all staff be automatically informed of the person's identity? Who was harmed by this incident?

Ha. This is the White House, not some private location. We have a right to know about EVERYTHING that goes on in the working portion of that building (which this was) and in many of the private sections.

Totally weird take. You must be trolling.

And I bet its not just the secret service who has the list of people who have been in the West Wing.

I am not trolling. I am interested in facts, not innuendo. Please enlighten me about where it says that the public has the right to know "EVERYTHING that goes on in the working portion of that building (which this was) and in many of the private sections" of the WH. I can understand if there was a threat to the safety and security of the individuals working and living in the WH, but how does a discarded/forgotten/dropped bag (or whatever) of cocaine that was found not to be anthrax pose a danger to people in the WH? And why is it a public matter?

I believe every person who visits the WH should be made public let alone the presence of Schedule 2 drugs. I don’t care who is President.

Adderrall is also a Schedule 2 drug and TFG was widely rumored to use it, at least in the past if not while in the WH. Innuendo can work both ways.

In addition, I did a little digging and apparently it is not written in stone that WH visitor logs have to be made public. For example, in 2017 the Trump administration announced it would not be making visitor logs public, in a break from Obama era policy.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-visitors/trump-white-house-will-not-make-visitor-logs-public-break-from-obama-policy-idUSKBN17G1GF

In fact, Politico started a database of Trump WH visitors whose visits were not made public. https://www.politico.com/interactives/databases/trump-white-house-visitor-logs-and-records/index.html

So for everyone claiming that the public has the right to know everything that goes on in the WH, it simply isn't true, despite what many may believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No evidence that there were hundreds of people there over the weekend.

No evidence it was Hunter... who wasn't even there over the weekend.

True, but we have no idea how long it was there before it was found.

They are supposed to do daily checks. If it was there for longer then it means someone in the Secret Service wasn't doing their job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting timing. Secret Service "finds" cocaine at the exact time that a criminal investigation is opened into Secret Service destruction of evidence and deletion of J6 text messages. And, I don't think any of the Trump loyalists involved have yet been purged from the White House.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/dhs-launched-criminal-probe-destruction-jan-6-secret-service-text-mess-rcna39392

My working theory: Trump-loyal SS planted the cocaine as retaliation for the investigation.

It's interesting that the Secret Service supposedly found it, was then vague about where it was found, and now is trying to claim they might not be able to know who it was, despite having logs and plenty of video, and apparently aren't bothering with any forensics like fingerprints on the bag. It's like they don't want to prove who it was, they just wanted the implication that it was Hunter. Despite Hunter not even being there when the baggie appeared.

I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out some SS agent planted it, pretended to find it and suggested it was Hunter's - but then it got out of hand because people not in on the stunt called in a Hazmat team.

Trump loyalists in the Secret Service destroyed evidence, deleted text messages relating to January 6th and so far have refused to come clean about what exactly happened on that fateful day. And, to date, we've seen zero accountability or change relating to it. I don't trust them as far as I can bowl them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is interesting to see the attitudes expressed on here. Let's be honest. If this was still Turnip's WH, it'd be national wall to wall 24/7 media coverage and massive speculation as to which Turnip kid it was. And endless talk show talk about what a threat this is to national security and a massive failure on the part of an abysmal administration and another evidence of how deeply morally bankrupt it was. And I admit this as someone who despises Turnip.

Of course it matters. And of course the powers that be have a pretty good idea who the coke belonged to.

Be smarter please. The Trump kids were working in the White House. Of course it matters if people working in the White House are high as kites. HB does not now, nor has he ever worked in the White House. Why can’t people hold facts in their heads?
Ps- Trump’s kids were absolutely a threat to our national security with or without cocaine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No evidence that there were hundreds of people there over the weekend.

No evidence it was Hunter... who wasn't even there over the weekend.

True, but we have no idea how long it was there before it was found.

You're right about one thing: "we have no idea." None of us do.

Well, we have some idea. The name of everyone who has been in that area is on a list.

No, "we" don't have "some idea"--only the LE officials and others involved in the investigation have some idea. And even if they know exactly who brought it in, is it our right as citizens to know who did it? If someone were caught with drugs in your place of employment, should all staff be automatically informed of the person's identity? Who was harmed by this incident?

Ha. This is the White House, not some private location. We have a right to know about EVERYTHING that goes on in the working portion of that building (which this was) and in many of the private sections.

Totally weird take. You must be trolling.

And I bet its not just the secret service who has the list of people who have been in the West Wing.

I am not trolling. I am interested in facts, not innuendo. Please enlighten me about where it says that the public has the right to know "EVERYTHING that goes on in the working portion of that building (which this was) and in many of the private sections" of the WH. I can understand if there was a threat to the safety and security of the individuals working and living in the WH, but how does a discarded/forgotten/dropped bag (or whatever) of cocaine that was found not to be anthrax pose a danger to people in the WH? And why is it a public matter?

I believe every person who visits the WH should be made public let alone the presence of Schedule 2 drugs. I don’t care who is President.

Adderrall is also a Schedule 2 drug and TFG was widely rumored to use it, at least in the past if not while in the WH. Innuendo can work both ways.

In addition, I did a little digging and apparently it is not written in stone that WH visitor logs have to be made public. For example, in 2017 the Trump administration announced it would not be making visitor logs public, in a break from Obama era policy.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-visitors/trump-white-house-will-not-make-visitor-logs-public-break-from-obama-policy-idUSKBN17G1GF

In fact, Politico started a database of Trump WH visitors whose visits were not made public. https://www.politico.com/interactives/databases/trump-white-house-visitor-logs-and-records/index.html

So for everyone claiming that the public has the right to know everything that goes on in the WH, it simply isn't true, despite what many may believe.

I don’t care if it’s statute or not, things should be disclosed. There is a reason Politico did that. You seemed to want to casually ignore now or generally be in the dark. I want to know who has access to Executive Branch policy/decision makers and why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is interesting to see the attitudes expressed on here. Let's be honest. If this was still Turnip's WH, it'd be national wall to wall 24/7 media coverage and massive speculation as to which Turnip kid it was. And endless talk show talk about what a threat this is to national security and a massive failure on the part of an abysmal administration and another evidence of how deeply morally bankrupt it was. And I admit this as someone who despises Turnip.

Of course it matters. And of course the powers that be have a pretty good idea who the coke belonged to.

Don't forget too that Mr. Biden was a proponent of sending people to jail for a decade minimum for possessing drugs such as these. Now he thinks it's funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No evidence that there were hundreds of people there over the weekend.

No evidence it was Hunter... who wasn't even there over the weekend.

True, but we have no idea how long it was there before it was found.

You're right about one thing: "we have no idea." None of us do.

Well, we have some idea. The name of everyone who has been in that area is on a list.

No, "we" don't have "some idea"--only the LE officials and others involved in the investigation have some idea. And even if they know exactly who brought it in, is it our right as citizens to know who did it? If someone were caught with drugs in your place of employment, should all staff be automatically informed of the person's identity? Who was harmed by this incident?

Ha. This is the White House, not some private location. We have a right to know about EVERYTHING that goes on in the working portion of that building (which this was) and in many of the private sections.

Totally weird take. You must be trolling.

And I bet its not just the secret service who has the list of people who have been in the West Wing.

I am not trolling. I am interested in facts, not innuendo. Please enlighten me about where it says that the public has the right to know "EVERYTHING that goes on in the working portion of that building (which this was) and in many of the private sections" of the WH. I can understand if there was a threat to the safety and security of the individuals working and living in the WH, but how does a discarded/forgotten/dropped bag (or whatever) of cocaine that was found not to be anthrax pose a danger to people in the WH? And why is it a public matter?

I believe every person who visits the WH should be made public let alone the presence of Schedule 2 drugs. I don’t care who is President.

Adderrall is also a Schedule 2 drug and TFG was widely rumored to use it, at least in the past if not while in the WH. Innuendo can work both ways.

In addition, I did a little digging and apparently it is not written in stone that WH visitor logs have to be made public. For example, in 2017 the Trump administration announced it would not be making visitor logs public, in a break from Obama era policy.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-visitors/trump-white-house-will-not-make-visitor-logs-public-break-from-obama-policy-idUSKBN17G1GF

In fact, Politico started a database of Trump WH visitors whose visits were not made public. https://www.politico.com/interactives/databases/trump-white-house-visitor-logs-and-records/index.html

So for everyone claiming that the public has the right to know everything that goes on in the WH, it simply isn't true, despite what many may believe.

Rumored only by the far left.
There is ZERO evidence that this is true.

[Anonymous]

With cameras and security personnel everywhere, there's no need to worry about finding out who it was; the coverup is well underway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With cameras and security personnel everywhere, there's no need to worry about finding out who it was; the coverup is well underway.

Well, the House Oversight and Accountability Committee (Republican-led) is on it so let's wait and see what happens, shall we?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-oversight-chief-seeks-information-from-secret-service-about-cocaine-found-in-white-house/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With cameras and security personnel everywhere, there's no need to worry about finding out who it was; the coverup is well underway.

As I thought and posted before but have now confirmed, there are no cameras inside the WW.

[Anonymous]

Is there a law that says SS investigations have to be published? That seems like a huge security risk, if it’s true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a law that says SS investigations have to be published? That seems like a huge security risk, if it’s true.

Investigations become more unlicensed through the process of indictment and trial. Not all aspects are made public though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is interesting to see the attitudes expressed on here. Let's be honest. If this was still Turnip's WH, it'd be national wall to wall 24/7 media coverage and massive speculation as to which Turnip kid it was. And endless talk show talk about what a threat this is to national security and a massive failure on the part of an abysmal administration and another evidence of how deeply morally bankrupt it was. And I admit this as someone who despises Turnip.

Of course it matters. And of course the powers that be have a pretty good idea who the coke belonged to.

Are you effing kidding me? Trump doxxed Obama’s address on Truth Social and a crazy MAGA showed up at his house with guns and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, and the thread here is five times as long because you all are obsessed with Hunter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is interesting to see the attitudes expressed on here. Let's be honest. If this was still Turnip's WH, it'd be national wall to wall 24/7 media coverage and massive speculation as to which Turnip kid it was. And endless talk show talk about what a threat this is to national security and a massive failure on the part of an abysmal administration and another evidence of how deeply morally bankrupt it was. And I admit this as someone who despises Turnip.

Of course it matters. And of course the powers that be have a pretty good idea who the coke belonged to.

Are you effing kidding me? Trump doxxed Obama’s address on Truth Social and a crazy MAGA showed up at his house with guns and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, and the thread here is five times as long because you all are obsessed with Hunter.

They should both be punished if allegations are proven and punished hard. No more but but buts for either side.