Quote:
Originally Posted by Teppler
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Mad isn’t the right word. It simply further confirms.
They got it wrong and they included
17 mistakes all against trump
0 evidence that pointed to innocence, which he was, added in
Come on. Let’s be realistic here.
|
I'm confused. Like what was the purpose (official, not sinister shadow) of the report? To evidence offences commited?
If so why would it evidence lack of offences he did not commit?
You need to explain to me, cos I can imagine how mistakes in evidencing a crime would be way more likely to slip in than mistakes evidencing 'commiting' innocence?
I'm not trying to gotcha you and i have no dog so there isn't really a way to countergotcha me, i just need details of how the report was meant to work so i can understand the discussion.