Cocaine in the White House

[Son of A Tiger 561]

This is gonna get interesting before it's over. 

Experts baffled by White House invoking Hatch Act to dodge Hunter cocaine question: 'ridiculous' | Fox News

[DKW 86 7,440]

Hatch Act with a side scooping of non-denial? Did I just hear that coming from the WH? 

[I_M4_AU 7,957]

7 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Hatch Act with a side scooping of non-denial? Did I just hear that coming from the WH? 

I wonder if they found out that if it was Hunter’s stash it would affect his plea deal?  Naw, that’s just a Republican byline. No way that would be the reason to hide information from the public.

[GoAU 1,600]

Partisan politics aside, imagine that powder was Anthrax or something equally nasty.  Big security slip…..

[DKW 86 7,440]

6 hours ago, GoAU said:

Partisan politics aside, imagine that powder was Anthrax or something equally nasty.  Big security slip…..

There is no one from the Biden Side worried about biological things getting into the WH, they've been vaxed... 😉

 

[AU9377 5,025]

On 7/7/2023 at 6:28 PM, GoAU said:

Partisan politics aside, imagine that powder was Anthrax or something equally nasty.  Big security slip…..

How would security be able to find something that small on someone?  They aren't going to do cavity searches or full body scans on everyone entering.  You can pat someone down and wand them all day and you wouldn't find that 1" by 1" flat baggy.  If it was Anthrax, that would mean that someone would need to get it much closer to the President than simply leaving it laying in a cubby hole. 

[DKW 86 7,440]

8 hours ago, AU9377 said:

How would security be able to find something that small on someone?  They aren't going to do cavity searches or full body scans on everyone entering.  You can pat someone down and wand them all day and you wouldn't find that 1" by 1" flat baggy.  If it was Anthrax, that would mean that someone would need to get it much closer to the President than simply leaving it laying in a cubby hole. 

Okay brainiac, maybe the job wasnt completed?

[Son of A Tiger 561]

The Secret Service copped out.

[Mikey 16,714]

11 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

The Secret Service copped out.

They know who that belonged to. The world's premier forensics labs and researchers can't find a smidgen of evidence?  A partially used baggie with NO fingerprints, NO DNA and not even a stray fiber of cloth or a small strand of hair? They didn't even conduct a single interview, just announced "investigation closed". That's BS and everybody knows it. They were told to shut it down and not to release the findings,  so they shut it down and kept the findings secret.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

5 minutes ago, Mikey said:

They know who that belonged to. The world's premier forensics labs and researchers can't find a smidgen of evidence?  A partially used baggie with NO fingerprints, NO DNA and not even a stray fiber of cloth or a small strand of hair? They didn't even conduct a single interview, just announced "investigation closed". That's BS and everybody knows it. They were told to shut it down and not to release the findings,  so they shut it down and kept the findings secret.

Rogue Secret Service guy loyal to trump planted it. 

[DKW 86 7,440]

2 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Rogue Secret Service guy loyal to trump planted it. 

That is possible...

[Mikey 16,714]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

Rogue Secret Service guy loyal to trump planted it. 

They know whose it was. If that had been the case they would have released their findings instead of burying their dirty little secret.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

17 minutes ago, Mikey said:

They know whose it was. If that had been the case they would have released their findings instead of burying their dirty little secret.

Covering up for their own, Mikey.

[LPTiger 5,173]

Does it not seem logical that the one place where people visiting the White House are instructed to leave certain personal belongings, thereby making the WH liable for their theft/disappearance, would be under video surveillance?    You have an endless supply of cameras and yet you choose this will be a place that will not be surveilled.    It is either a lie or extremely careless...

[DKW 86 7,440]

The cameras were there to guard their stash of drugs...lol

 

[TexasTiger 13,000]

I've personally worked in a variety of situations that are pretty well surveiled and they are still blind spots. Multiple people move through a space over hours and you don't see everything or every spot. But don't let me stop imaginations from running wild.

[LPTiger 5,173]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

I've personally worked in a variety of situations that are pretty well surveiled and they are still blind spots. Multiple people move through a space over hours and you don't see everything or every spot. But don't let me stop imaginations from running wild.

TT I would venture a guess that the places where you worked that were "pretty well surveilled" are not comparable to the level of security that exists at the US President's home.    Of course there are blind spots, but one would not expect the place where the public is placing their belongings to be one of them.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

23 minutes ago, LPTiger said:

TT I would venture a guess that the places where you worked that were "pretty well surveilled" are not comparable to the level of security that exists at the US President's home.    Of course there are blind spots, but one would not expect the place where the public is placing their belongings to be one of them.

My guess is that exits & entrances are well surveiled, not every corner of every room. The goal is security, not spying and security does not overly rely on cameras.

[Mikey 16,714]

6 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

My guess is that exits & entrances are well surveiled, not every corner of every room. The goal is security, not spying and security does not overly rely on cameras.

You're just going to ignore the missing forensic evidence and talk about cameras? Who cares about cameras, the proof is in the forensics and that is being covered up.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

9 minutes ago, Mikey said:

You're just going to ignore the missing forensic evidence and talk about cameras? Who cares about cameras, the proof is in the forensics and that is being covered up.

Wild speculation- your forte.

[Mikey 16,714]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

Wild speculation- your forte.

You need to spend a day or two catching up on modern forensics. In this day and time, the world's top investigative agencies cannot find a smidgen of evidence? On a used baggie that is said to have fallen out of some careless user's pocket? That's preposterous and if you don't know that you're very poorly informed.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

34 minutes ago, Mikey said:

You need to spend a day or two catching up on modern forensics. In this day and time, the world's top investigative agencies cannot find a smidgen of evidence? On a used baggie that is said to have fallen out of some careless user's pocket? That's preposterous and if you don't know that you're very poorly informed.

Actually you’ve described a professional plant designed to create speculation & innuendo. Or the type of investigation that might take place for anthrax, but not for a small baggie of cocaine. Although even then it’s not always as easy as you guys assume:

”When the anthrax case began, FBI agents had no actual fingerprints, no convenient DNA sample with which to collar a suspect. ”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/how-anthrax-sleuths-cracked-the-case-by-decoding-genetic-fingerprints/2011/04/08/AF6iTtqD_story.html

[Mikey 16,714]

9 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Actually you’ve described a professional plant designed to create speculation & innuendo. Or the type of investigation that might take place for anthrax, but not for a small baggie of cocaine. Although even then it’s not always as easy as you guys assume:

”When the anthrax case began, FBI agents had no actual fingerprints, no convenient DNA sample with which to collar a suspect. ”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/how-anthrax-sleuths-cracked-the-case-by-decoding-genetic-fingerprints/2011/04/08/AF6iTtqD_story.html

Why not just give up on this question? With every succeeding post you sound more and more silly.

[TexasTiger 13,000]

14 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Why not just give up on this question? With every succeeding post you sound more and more silly.

You sound that way on almost every post, yet you persist.

[Mikey 16,714]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

You sound that way on almost every post, yet you persist.

I'm not the one claiming that some careless yo-yo who was stupid enough to leave his stash behind was also clever enough to avoid leaving any tiny smidgen of evidence. That wiggling belongs to you and the very few who are trying to cover for this laughable event.