Anonymous wrote:I’m totally fine with the President and his family using cocaine. Hey, they are doing a great job so let’s supply them with whatever they need.

Anonymous wrote:The Biden administration that tells you that they don't know how a bag of cocaine got into the most secure building in the entire country is the same regime that wants you to trust them with the security of the country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is curious that no finger print could be found. I can understand no "matching" finger print, but not no finger print at all. That does seem fishy.

This is what I’m saying.

Full disclosure I’ve never done drugs, ever, not even weed, so I don’t know how people carry around their stash. I’ve seen plastic bags of it on TV dramas, but unless they put it in some sort of little box and handle it with gloves or tweezers, I fail to see how it just arrived there, fished out of someone’s pocket or purse, with no fingerprints and no DNA. What, did they wear gloves to remove the bag from their pocket? “Oh, just a minute, I need to put on gloves, for reasons.”

It’s very weird. The GOP has shown themselves to have no scruples and a willingness to do whatever they think is suitable to get the results they want. This came right on the heels of the GOP having a collective breakdown that Hunter wasn’t sufficiently punished or whatever in their mind. And unless I’m wrong, I don’t think Hunter ever did cocaine, so it’s an absolutely moronic but purposeful move by someone.

If it were a staffer, I’d like to think that person would be appropriately and confidentially dealt with and they would have said “the fingerprints were too smeared, we don’t know.” But they didn’t.

Hunter Biden is a hot mess. If he brought in a bag of coke and left it, his fingerprints and DNA would be all over it.

That’s how I know this isn’t Hunter’s coke.

No prints and no DNA? That’s a piece of conveniently planted evidence.

Anonymous wrote:Within a few days of the discovery (less than 48 hours) Politico comes out with this article. The fix was in from the beginning

Anonymous wrote:Wait, so now people think Joe is a coke head?

Man, this guy is awesome!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the Congressional briefing today, this is the 3rd time the Secret Service has found cocaine on the peoperty.

Wow! The plot thickens. Details should be forthcoming.

Anonymous wrote:According to the Congressional briefing today, this is the 3rd time the Secret Service has found cocaine on the peoperty.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is curious that no finger print could be found. I can understand no "matching" finger print, but not no finger print at all. That does seem fishy.

This is what I’m saying.

Full disclosure I’ve never done drugs, ever, not even weed, so I don’t know how people carry around their stash. I’ve seen plastic bags of it on TV dramas, but unless they put it in some sort of little box and handle it with gloves or tweezers, I fail to see how it just arrived there, fished out of someone’s pocket or purse, with no fingerprints and no DNA. What, did they wear gloves to remove the bag from their pocket? “Oh, just a minute, I need to put on gloves, for reasons.”

It’s very weird. The GOP has shown themselves to have no scruples and a willingness to do whatever they think is suitable to get the results they want. This came right on the heels of the GOP having a collective breakdown that Hunter wasn’t sufficiently punished or whatever in their mind. And unless I’m wrong, I don’t think Hunter ever did cocaine, so it’s an absolutely moronic but purposeful move by someone.

If it were a staffer, I’d like to think that person would be appropriately and confidentially dealt with and they would have said “the fingerprints were too smeared, we don’t know.” But they didn’t.

Hunter Biden is a hot mess. If he brought in a bag of coke and left it, his fingerprints and DNA would be all over it.

That’s how I know this isn’t Hunter’s coke.

No prints and no DNA? That’s a piece of conveniently planted evidence.

Can you tell us Sherlock why would they plant evidence in the high-traffic area? They clearly had access to other parts of the WH where the discovery of the bag with coke point to someone who needs to be discredited.