Classified material

[Beebs52]

So apparently TFG is a reference to Biden's inability to remember things, like names (and former jobs, schools, degrees and rank within class, but I digress). Why would BJ use that as a reference.

And don't say Biden was intentionally trying to disrespect former President Trump. He's had to resort to general references in many many occasions such as "that guy" and "you know the thing".

Appreciate the reminder that you helped put someone mentally incompetent in charge of your country.

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Ah, but someone who is mentally incompetent may purposely or inadvertently act morally and ethically bankruptly. So, which is worse?

[Bob78164]

So apparently TFG is a reference to Biden's inability to remember things, like names (and former jobs, schools, degrees and rank within class, but I digress). Why would BJ use that as a reference.

And don't say Biden was intentionally trying to disrespect former President Trump. He's had to resort to general references in many many occasions such as "that guy" and "you know the thing".

Appreciate the reminder that you helped put someone mentally incompetent in charge of your country.

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Don't buy into their rhetoric. Anyone who thinks that President Biden is mentally incompetent is living in a fantasy world and needs to be arrested by the gazpacho police. --Bob

[BackInTex]

So apparently TFG is a reference to Biden's inability to remember things, like names (and former jobs, schools, degrees and rank within class, but I digress). Why would BJ use that as a reference.

And don't say Biden was intentionally trying to disrespect former President Trump. He's had to resort to general references in many many occasions such as "that guy" and "you know the thing".

Appreciate the reminder that you helped put someone mentally incompetent in charge of your country.

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Your honesty is appreciated. I don't mind having disagreements with folks who can actually articulate what we are disagreeing over.

[BackInTex]

So apparently TFG is a reference to Biden's inability to remember things, like names (and former jobs, schools, degrees and rank within class, but I digress). Why would BJ use that as a reference.

And don't say Biden was intentionally trying to disrespect former President Trump. He's had to resort to general references in many many occasions such as "that guy" and "you know the thing".

Appreciate the reminder that you helped put someone mentally incompetent in charge of your country.

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Ah, but someone who is mentally incompetent may purposely or inadvertently act morally and ethically bankruptly. So, which is worse?

Or, as more likely the case, due to incompetence allow stronger enemies to take advantage

[Bob Juch]

Sources have said there were many top-secret documents in TFG's stash, as well as some "beyond-top-secret". Also, the papers were not taken to Mar-a-Largo upon TFG's exit but bit by bit over the years.

Oh yes, the national security classification that is so high and so secret that it does not actually exist -- "beyond-top-secret".

There are three and only three national security classifications available for documents:

(1) "Top Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.

(2) "Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security.

(3) "Confidential" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security.

I can hear you now: "What about Unclassified?" Obviously, there cannot be a classification of a document that is "there is no classification level." Also, there no longer is "For Official Use Only". What we have now is the designation "Controlled Unclassified Information."

Also, contrary to what movies may have told you, "Code Word Clearance" is not a classification or security designation itself. It is used to denote a limited group of people at a security classification level that can access/read the information. You can have a code word for Secret documents or Top Secret. I do not think that it is used much for Confidential.

I'm aware of that, that's why I put "beyond-top-secret" in quotes.

One of my clients requires me to classify every email and saved document.

[Bob Juch]

So apparently TFG is a reference to Biden's inability to remember things, like names (and former jobs, schools, degrees and rank within class, but I digress). Why would BJ use that as a reference.

And don't say Biden was intentionally trying to disrespect former President Trump. He's had to resort to general references in many many occasions such as "that guy" and "you know the thing".

Appreciate the reminder that you helped put someone mentally incompetent in charge of your country.

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Don't buy into their rhetoric. Anyone who thinks that President Biden is mentally incompetent is living in a fantasy world and needs to be arrested by the gazpacho police. --Bob

Are the gazpacho police soup Nazis?

[Bob Juch]

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Ah, but someone who is mentally incompetent may purposely or inadvertently act morally and ethically bankruptly. So, which is worse?

Or, as more likely the case, due to incompetence allow stronger enemies to take advantage

And that was the problem with TFG.

[flockofseagulls104]

So apparently TFG is a reference to Biden's inability to remember things, like names (and former jobs, schools, degrees and rank within class, but I digress). Why would BJ use that as a reference.

And don't say Biden was intentionally trying to disrespect former President Trump. He's had to resort to general references in many many occasions such as "that guy" and "you know the thing".

Appreciate the reminder that you helped put someone mentally incompetent in charge of your country.

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Don't buy into their rhetoric. Anyone who thinks that President Biden is mentally incompetent is living in a fantasy world and needs to be arrested by the gazpacho police. --Bob

https://jackson.house.gov/news/document ... mentID=351

Dr. Jackson would ultimately lead the White House Medical Unit as Physician to the President during the Obama and Trump Administrations.

As a former physician to three Presidents of the United States, I know what it takes mentally and physically to execute the duties of Commander-in-Chief and Head of State. Joe Biden has continually proven to me and to the world that something isn’t right. The American people deserve to have absolute confidence in their President’s cognitive ability. Taking the cognitive test will be an important first step in either reassuring worried Americans, or in identifying and properly treating symptoms of impairment that are consistent with a variety of cognitive diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis.

[Bob78164]

I'll take someone who is mentally incompetent over someone who is ethically and morally bankrupt.

Don't buy into their rhetoric. Anyone who thinks that President Biden is mentally incompetent is living in a fantasy world and needs to be arrested by the gazpacho police. --Bob

https://jackson.house.gov/news/document ... mentID=351

Dr. Jackson would ultimately lead the White House Medical Unit as Physician to the President during the Obama and Trump Administrations.

As a former physician to three Presidents of the United States, I know what it takes mentally and physically to execute the duties of Commander-in-Chief and Head of State. Joe Biden has continually proven to me and to the world that something isn’t right. The American people deserve to have absolute confidence in their President’s cognitive ability. Taking the cognitive test will be an important first step in either reassuring worried Americans, or in identifying and properly treating symptoms of impairment that are consistent with a variety of cognitive diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis.

You're relying on this Ronny Jackson? Or maybe this one? You might want to consider your sources a little more carefully. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

I guess Flock's latest theatrical departure from the Bored didn't last very long. Just long enough to avoid facing contrary facts in his last thread and hope we didn't notice.

[BackInTex]

Don't buy into their rhetoric. Anyone who thinks that President Biden is mentally incompetent is living in a fantasy world and needs to be arrested by the gazpacho police. --Bob

https://jackson.house.gov/news/document ... mentID=351

Dr. Jackson would ultimately lead the White House Medical Unit as Physician to the President during the Obama and Trump Administrations.

As a former physician to three Presidents of the United States, I know what it takes mentally and physically to execute the duties of Commander-in-Chief and Head of State. Joe Biden has continually proven to me and to the world that something isn’t right. The American people deserve to have absolute confidence in their President’s cognitive ability. Taking the cognitive test will be an important first step in either reassuring worried Americans, or in identifying and properly treating symptoms of impairment that are consistent with a variety of cognitive diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis.

You're relying on this Ronny Jackson? Or maybe this one? You might want to consider your sources a little more carefully. --Bob

Holy cow! He made inappropriate comments, drank, and took medication! Neither of the last 3 Democrat presidents has ever done that.

[Bob Juch]

Don't buy into their rhetoric. Anyone who thinks that President Biden is mentally incompetent is living in a fantasy world and needs to be arrested by the gazpacho police. --Bob

https://jackson.house.gov/news/document ... mentID=351

Dr. Jackson would ultimately lead the White House Medical Unit as Physician to the President during the Obama and Trump Administrations.

As a former physician to three Presidents of the United States, I know what it takes mentally and physically to execute the duties of Commander-in-Chief and Head of State. Joe Biden has continually proven to me and to the world that something isn’t right. The American people deserve to have absolute confidence in their President’s cognitive ability. Taking the cognitive test will be an important first step in either reassuring worried Americans, or in identifying and properly treating symptoms of impairment that are consistent with a variety of cognitive diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis.

You're relying on this Ronny Jackson? Or maybe this one? You might want to consider your sources a little more carefully. --Bob

I think it's this one: https://www.newsweek.com/ronny-jackson- ... and-905409

[Bob Juch]

https://jackson.house.gov/news/document ... mentID=351

Dr. Jackson would ultimately lead the White House Medical Unit as Physician to the President during the Obama and Trump Administrations.

As a former physician to three Presidents of the United States, I know what it takes mentally and physically to execute the duties of Commander-in-Chief and Head of State. Joe Biden has continually proven to me and to the world that something isn’t right. The American people deserve to have absolute confidence in their President’s cognitive ability. Taking the cognitive test will be an important first step in either reassuring worried Americans, or in identifying and properly treating symptoms of impairment that are consistent with a variety of cognitive diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis.

You're relying on this Ronny Jackson? Or maybe this one? You might want to consider your sources a little more carefully. --Bob

Holy cow! He made inappropriate comments, drank, and took medication! Neither of the last 3 Democrat presidents has ever done that.

Are you still running for King of Whataboutistan?

[tlynn78]

Lmao! I knew the mental gymnastics of our bored lefties would be amusing as we entered the Biden years, but y'all are approaching bat-shit crazy only one year in...might want to pace yourselves.

[flockofseagulls104]

https://jackson.house.gov/news/document ... mentID=351

Dr. Jackson would ultimately lead the White House Medical Unit as Physician to the President during the Obama and Trump Administrations.

As a former physician to three Presidents of the United States, I know what it takes mentally and physically to execute the duties of Commander-in-Chief and Head of State. Joe Biden has continually proven to me and to the world that something isn’t right. The American people deserve to have absolute confidence in their President’s cognitive ability. Taking the cognitive test will be an important first step in either reassuring worried Americans, or in identifying and properly treating symptoms of impairment that are consistent with a variety of cognitive diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis.

You're relying on this Ronny Jackson? Or maybe this one? You might want to consider your sources a little more carefully. --Bob

Holy cow! He ALLEGEDLY made inappropriate comments, drank, and took medication! None of the last 3 Democrat presidents has ever done that.

Fixed it for you. But aren't allegations enough if you're not a democrat? Only democrats get the benefit of having 'Without Evidence' included in any headline. Accusations from unnamed sources are fine and dandy.

[Bob78164]

https://jackson.house.gov/news/document ... mentID=351

Dr. Jackson would ultimately lead the White House Medical Unit as Physician to the President during the Obama and Trump Administrations.

As a former physician to three Presidents of the United States, I know what it takes mentally and physically to execute the duties of Commander-in-Chief and Head of State. Joe Biden has continually proven to me and to the world that something isn’t right. The American people deserve to have absolute confidence in their President’s cognitive ability. Taking the cognitive test will be an important first step in either reassuring worried Americans, or in identifying and properly treating symptoms of impairment that are consistent with a variety of cognitive diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, vascular dementia, Parkinson’s, or multiple sclerosis.

You're relying on this Ronny Jackson? Or maybe this one? You might want to consider your sources a little more carefully. --Bob

Holy cow! He made inappropriate comments, drank, and took medication! Neither of the last 3 Democrat presidents has ever done that.

He was overseas, traveling with the President, which means that he got drunk and hungover while he was on call. Doesn’t say much for his professional judgment, does it? And that’s leaving aside that he’s now sitting in Congress and has every incentive to spread FUD about the Biden Administration. —Bob

[BackInTex]

You're relying on this Ronny Jackson? Or maybe this one? You might want to consider your sources a little more carefully. --Bob

Holy cow! He made inappropriate comments, drank, and took medication! Neither of the last 3 Democrat presidents has ever done that.

He was overseas, traveling with the President, which means that he got drunk and hungover while he was on call. Doesn’t say much for his professional judgment, does it? And that’s leaving aside that he’s now sitting in Congress and has every incentive to spread FUD about the Biden Administration. —Bob

Doesn't say much for his personal judgement. Says nothing about his professional judgment. There is a difference. I'd like to think you know it.

[silverscreenselect]

Holy cow! He made inappropriate comments, drank, and took medication! Neither of the last 3 Democrat presidents has ever done that.

He was overseas, traveling with the President, which means that he got drunk and hungover while he was on call. Doesn’t say much for his professional judgment, does it? And that’s leaving aside that he’s now sitting in Congress and has every incentive to spread FUD about the Biden Administration. —Bob

Doesn't say much for his personal judgement. Says nothing about his professional judgment. There is a difference. I'd like to think you know it.

A physician charged with the personal care of the President who is traveling with the President and gets drunk and hungover while on call definitely exhibits poor professional judgment. If he had been in private practice and something adverse occurred, he'd already have his checkbook out and writing a number with a large number of zeroes at the end to settle the case.

[flockofseagulls104]

Just responding with a different perspective. Here are what I believe are the relevant documents concerning the allegations against Ronny Jackson

https://www.dodig.mil/reports.html/Arti ... us-navy-r/

https://media.defense.gov/2021/Mar/03/2 ... 21-057.PDF

My perspective. Which is influenced by incidents like the confirmations of Justice Clarence Thomas and the unsuccessful confirmation of Robert Bork. Both of which were controversial and very, shall we say, unseemly and questionable, setting new lows for the defamation of the nominees (until the Kavanaugh hearings). And coincidentally, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee for both of those hearings was.... Take a guess. So we start from that perspective.

It just so happens, Dr. Jackson served as the Physician to the President from 2013 to 2018, until he was nominated for Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Most of his service was as Physician to President Obama. According to Wikipedia, the responsibilities of this office also include:

providing comprehensive medical care to the members of the president's immediate family, the Vice President, and the Vice President's family.

. So I can only assume that Dr. Jackson may have had opportunities to examine VP Biden as well. As far as I know, there were no controversies or complaints about Dr Jackson while he served the Obama Administration.

If you look at the documents, it says they started getting complaints about Dr. Jackson on April 26, 2018. Dr. Jackson was nominated for the post of Secretary of Veteran Affairs on April 16, 2018.
Also coincidentally, these complaints were originated by

The Ranking Member of that Committee (the Veterans Affairs Committee),
Senator Jon Tester (D-MT), (who) released a two-page summary on April 25, 2018

. So, it looks like, to me, the democrat member of the Veterans Affairs Committee knew about these complaints BEFORE they were called into the DOD hotline. You have to ask: Did he start behaving badly in April of 2018? Why were there no complaints about him for the 3-4 years he served in the Obama Administration?

Admittedly, the investigation was conducted by the military Inspector General. But from my point of view, which takes into account that the vote in Washington DC typically is 90-95% democrat and the town consists of very wealthy politicians, bureaucrats and their sycophants, everything in that town has the great potential to be politically corrupted. That, for me, would include military investigations. He was found guilty based on a "Preponderance of Evidence", which says to me, though I am not a lawyer, that there were a lot of people who said he did it. No physical proof, just testimony. Dr. Jackson still contends none of this stuff ever happened, but you would expect him to say that.

Later on that year, the democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee went on to show that they are capable of this kind of smearing of a nominee's name during the Kavanaugh hearing. Just wondering, because maybe I have forgotten: have there been any confirmation hearings of democrat nominees that are in any way comparable to the Bork, Thomas and Kavanaugh hearings, in terms of personal attack and defamation? Maybe we were lucky to be spared the Garland hearing. Who knows, maybe we would have found out he pissed on Russian hotel room beds or something like that....

That's my perspective. It's different from yours. But I try to examine things myself rather than relying on being spoon fed. Maybe I'm wrong. But don't quote me some egghead's quote you find on the internet to try and convince me. I don't care if they are from the right or left. Defaming an individual's character as a way of dismissing their argument is one sure way of persuading me that what they have to say probably holds some water. Anyone who does that should really be held to the same standard and be vetted just as thoroughly, if not to a higher degree.

Now, back to the main topic: Why is this 'major' story that brings President Trump back in the news being trumpeted all over the usual suspect news media all the way here to the bored? At this point in time? Think of some reasons.

Sorry to keep adding on, but I add thoughts as I think of them. Along this line, Donald Trump was no stranger to publicity before 2016. Anyone know of any reference of him being attached to 'white supremacy' prior to 2016? Or did he only join the KKK when he became president?

[Bob Juch]

15 boxes: Inside the long, strange trip of Trump’s classified records

The journey underscores how defiantly and indiscriminately Trump violated the Presidential Records Act

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -15-boxes/

[flockofseagulls104]

15 boxes: Inside the long, strange trip of Trump’s classified records

The journey underscores how defiantly and indiscriminately Trump violated the Presidential Records Act

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -15-boxes/

Any 'news' story that uses as many inflammatory and leading adjectives and adverbs (like 'defiantly and indiscriminately', for example [From who's perspective?]) that are not quotes from named individuals as this one does cannot be taken seriously as an objective or unbiased account. We should all know that. When I am reading a 'news' story, when I see that, I immediately discount the story as being more propaganda. That is for the editorial pages, not the news pages. And it's not unexpected coming from the Washington Post, which has a long history of it.

[jarnon]

I don't care if they are from the right or left. Defaming an individual's character as a way of dismissing their argument is one sure way of persuading me that what they have to say probably holds some water.

Any 'news' story that uses as many inflammatory and leading adjectives and adverbs (like 'defiantly and indiscriminately', for example [From who's perspective?]) that are not quotes from named individuals as this one does cannot be taken seriously as an objective or unbiased account. We should all know that. When I am reading a 'news' story, when I see that, I immediately discount the story as being more propaganda. That is for the editorial pages, not the news pages. And it's not unexpected coming from the Washington Post, which has a long history of it.

When 'journalists' are accused of bias and disguising opinion and fact, as a way of dismissing their argument, it makes me think what they have to say probably holds some water.

[flockofseagulls104]

I don't care if they are from the right or left. Defaming an individual's character as a way of dismissing their argument is one sure way of persuading me that what they have to say probably holds some water.

Any 'news' story that uses as many inflammatory and leading adjectives and adverbs (like 'defiantly and indiscriminately', for example [From who's perspective?]) that are not quotes from named individuals as this one does cannot be taken seriously as an objective or unbiased account. We should all know that. When I am reading a 'news' story, when I see that, I immediately discount the story as being more propaganda. That is for the editorial pages, not the news pages. And it's not unexpected coming from the Washington Post, which has a long history of it.

When 'journalists' are accused of bias and disguising opinion and fact, as a way of dismissing their argument, it makes me think what they have to say probably holds some water.

'Journalists', by definition, should not be engaging in argument. They should be reporting facts and not giving any indication what their personal opinion is. That is where I'm coming from. Do you disagree?

[Bob Juch]

I don't care if they are from the right or left. Defaming an individual's character as a way of dismissing their argument is one sure way of persuading me that what they have to say probably holds some water.

Any 'news' story that uses as many inflammatory and leading adjectives and adverbs (like 'defiantly and indiscriminately', for example [From who's perspective?]) that are not quotes from named individuals as this one does cannot be taken seriously as an objective or unbiased account. We should all know that. When I am reading a 'news' story, when I see that, I immediately discount the story as being more propaganda. That is for the editorial pages, not the news pages. And it's not unexpected coming from the Washington Post, which has a long history of it.

When 'journalists' are accused of bias and disguising opinion and fact, as a way of dismissing their argument, it makes me think what they have to say probably holds some water.

'Journalists', by definition, should not be engaging in argument. They should be reporting facts and not giving any indication what their personal opinion is. That is where I'm coming from. Do you disagree?

Journalists are not reporters.

[flockofseagulls104]

When 'journalists' are accused of bias and disguising opinion and fact, as a way of dismissing their argument, it makes me think what they have to say probably holds some water.

'Journalists', by definition, should not be engaging in argument. They should be reporting facts and not giving any indication what their personal opinion is. That is where I'm coming from. Do you disagree?

Journalists are not reporters.

You might want to spend some time before you answer. What you said may be true, but neither reporters nor journalists should be advocates. That is the point I was making. What you said has nothing to do with the point being made. And that seems to be a recurring theme with you.