Tulsi Gabbard has resigned as President Donald Trump’s director of national intelligence, saying she needed to leave office as her husband battles cancer.
Do you really think I’m not aware of the implications here and the fact that president and every member of his admin are chronically dishonest? All I’ve done is note what different outlets are reporting. Thanks though, I’ll try to “use my brain”.
Pretty obviously you were implying that it was not due to her husband’s health, but rather that Trump wanted her out, as the supposed insider said. Sure, I believe that. I’d even go further and ask who gave this probable Russian agent’s husband rare bone cancer.
I’m not sure the reports do conflict. What the reports say do conflict, but at their base level, they are just reports of what different people are claiming.
It’s simple. You’re critizing the company for reporting two separate opinions/lies/whatever it was. Those reports are accurate. The content of the quotes from them may not be.
I know you know that, but I decided to type it out with more words just to mitigate any “nuh uh” bullshit.
Well, there’s the answer as to why Reuters is reporting that?
Use your brain. Why are there conflicting reports?
Do you really think I’m not aware of the implications here and the fact that president and every member of his admin are chronically dishonest? All I’ve done is note what different outlets are reporting. Thanks though, I’ll try to “use my brain”.
You seem to be unaware of what I was asking, whether intentional or not I’m not sure.
Pretty obviously you were implying that it was not due to her husband’s health, but rather that Trump wanted her out, as the supposed insider said. Sure, I believe that. I’d even go further and ask who gave this probable Russian agent’s husband rare bone cancer.
Pretty obviously I was not implying anything, I was attempting to find the truth.
“Just asking questions”, huh?
Not in your town! No questions allowed!
I’m not sure the reports do conflict. What the reports say do conflict, but at their base level, they are just reports of what different people are claiming.
Huh!?
It’s pretty clear
It’s very not.
So you just conveniently opted out of quoting the last part, chose to argue about that choice, and you’re going to triple down?
Motherfucker I will **quadruple down __ ** on the fact that the additional context does not make it any more clear, that’s why I didn’t quote it.
It’s simple. You’re critizing the company for reporting two separate opinions/lies/whatever it was. Those reports are accurate. The content of the quotes from them may not be.
I know you know that, but I decided to type it out with more words just to mitigate any “nuh uh” bullshit.