Grabby Joe
-
wrote on 6 Sept 2020, 20:30 last edited by George K 9 Jun 2020, 20:31
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/destroyed-biden-records/
Apparently, at some photo-op in 2009, Biden "cupped his hand" under the breast of a Secret Service agent's girlfriend. Said SS agent didn't like it and there was a "physical altercation" between the two. The agent was suspended.
The Secret Service has (ahem) destroyed these records due to "retention standards."
Another SS agent:
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the agent asserted that, “We had to cancel the VP Christmas get together at the Vice President’s house because Biden would grope all of our wives and girlfriend’s asses.” The annual party was for agents and Navy personnel who were tasked with protecting the Biden family.
“He would mess with every single woman or teen. It was horrible,” the agent said.
Ronald Kessler has claimed that Joe likes to skinny dip in front of SS agents in his book. This appears to be another instance of Joe being Joe.
Of course, it's anonymous....
At the link I posted, Judicial Watch comments:
In a July 13, 2020 response to Judicial Watch’s request, the Secret Service appeared to confirm that a file on the alleged incident existed at some point, asserting, “[T]here are no responsive records or documents pertaining to your request in our files,” because “the above mentioned file(s) has been destroyed” due to “retention standards.” The Secret Service added that, “[n]o additional information is available.” It did not deny the incident had occurred. In its lawsuit, Judicial Watch intends to test the Secret Service’s assertion that it destroyed all records about the incident.
“We had not been able to confirm whether the report about the alleged altercation might be true until the Secret Service itself suggested it destroyed records about the incident,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Here's another question. If the agent did, indeed, get into a "physical altercation" with the Vice President, how is it that he was not fired, but only suspended. This should be grounds for dismissal, shouldn't it?
-
wrote on 6 Sept 2020, 22:19 last edited by
I think the likely answer is it didn’t happen.
-
wrote on 6 Sept 2020, 22:25 last edited by
It's been confirmed.
(Using the Standard level and meaning of the word confirmation, nowadays).
-
wrote on 6 Sept 2020, 22:28 last edited by
@jon-nyc said in Grabby Joe:
I think the likely answer is it didn’t happen.
Secret Service has confirmed that records about the incident have been destroyed. If nothing happened, there would have been no record.
But no...
So, clearly, something happened. As to what that is, that's open to speculation.
-
wrote on 6 Sept 2020, 23:16 last edited by
Do we know something happened?
Do we know that their reply isn’t standard for any request that predates their record retention policy?
Do we know the wording of the request? Was it ‘records pertaining to the event held at such and such date’? Or was it ‘records pertaining to the physical altercation between a secret service agent and the sitting Vice President?’
IOW, insofar as the response confirms ‘something happened’ what does that really mean?
-
Do we know something happened?
Do we know that their reply isn’t standard for any request that predates their record retention policy?
Do we know the wording of the request? Was it ‘records pertaining to the event held at such and such date’? Or was it ‘records pertaining to the physical altercation between a secret service agent and the sitting Vice President?’
IOW, insofar as the response confirms ‘something happened’ what does that really mean?
wrote on 6 Sept 2020, 23:19 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Grabby Joe:
Do we know something happened?
Do we know that their reply isn’t standard for any request that predates their record retention policy?
Do we know the wording of the request? Was it ‘records pertaining to the event held at such and such date’? Or was it ‘records pertaining to the physical altercation between a secret service agent and the sitting Vice President?’
IOW, insofar as the response confirms ‘something happened’ what does that really mean?
About as much as the latest confirmation about the Atlantic's Trump story...
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
wrote on 6 Sept 2020, 23:47 last edited by
Sit down and shut up
We have to believe the woman
-
@jon-nyc said in Grabby Joe:
Do we know something happened?
Do we know that their reply isn’t standard for any request that predates their record retention policy?
Do we know the wording of the request? Was it ‘records pertaining to the event held at such and such date’? Or was it ‘records pertaining to the physical altercation between a secret service agent and the sitting Vice President?’
IOW, insofar as the response confirms ‘something happened’ what does that really mean?
About as much as the latest confirmation about the Atlantic's Trump story...
wrote on 7 Sept 2020, 02:24 last edited by@Jolly said in Grabby Joe:
About as much as the latest confirmation about the Atlantic's Trump story...
Exactly. LOL
