This is a very weird story, and gets weirder and weirder. The bombs are so unsophisticated and amateurish, apparently, that the "experts" are thinking they were supposed to not go off, and even supposed to get intercepted. I don't think that any speculation about who is responsible is useful until more is known. Can't imagine the idiot won't be caught.
Leaving aside your inference that the person(s) behind this were deliberately capable of producing a bomb that wouldn't go off, to make sure that no Democrats were actually harmed, (which you follow up by encouraging others not to speculate on the provenance of) why did you feel the need to write "...experts..." as you did?
Are you saying those examining these devices don't know what they are doing? Have they given them to the FBI's janitor to have a look at..?
You can create whatever it is you want to create out of my comment, as is the norm on this forum whenever I post a comment. Fishing for "likes" are you?
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
Experts can only be seen as experts if they back up your views. Trump realises this as do a lot of his supporters.
Trump is always keen on objective reporting and thought - he's not the type to go on Twitter and talk s***. He obviously wouldn't do that as he's US President.
It's important not to jump to conclusions over these packages even though most right minded people have a good idea.
You can create whatever it is you want to create out of my comment, as is the norm on this forum whenever I post a comment.
So say what you mean rather than trying to make a political stance with every post!
If you hadn't put experts in inverted commas then we wouldn't be second guessing your post.
As @Dazzler21 points out, you used the "..." around the word experts without any further explanation as to which "experts" you were referring to. If they're the FBI ones then you appear to be casting doubt on their expertise (and if so why?). If someone else then maybe you should have been more explicit as to who perhaps? Then no one would need to speculate on what point you're trying to make.
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
Why not?
I've already explained why, I have no personal knowledge of their expertise.
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
Why not?
I've already explained why, I have no personal knowledge of their expertise.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that people called in by US government to inspect potential bombs would probably know about bombs. Its not the kind of thing you leave to amateurs.
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
Why not?
I've already explained why, I have no personal knowledge of their expertise.
It’s a pretty fair assumption. God you’re an idiot.
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
Why not?
I've already explained why, I have no personal knowledge of their expertise.
It’s a pretty fair assumption. God you’re an idiot.
You can only say that, however, if you have personal knowledge of "idiots" though.
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
Why not?
I've already explained why, I have no personal knowledge of their expertise.
It’s a pretty fair assumption. God you’re an idiot.
You can only say that, however, if you have personal knowledge of "idiots" though.
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
Why not?
I've already explained why, I have no personal knowledge of their expertise.
It’s a pretty fair assumption. God you’re an idiot.
Name calling is more idiotic. I think it's generally termed, "abuse".
No political stance at all in this comment, and the reason I used the commas is because I have no personal knowledge that the people making these statements are experts.
You don’t think the US government would use experts to examine a situation where several of the most high-profile political people in the country are targeted with bombs?
Why not?
I've already explained why, I have no personal knowledge of their expertise.
It’s a pretty fair assumption. God you’re an idiot.
Name calling is more idiotic. I think it's generally termed, "abuse".
It's not really. It's more a statement of fact than name-calling. Calling you "twatface" or something like that is abusive name-calling.
The "I am rubber, you are glue" defence doesn't make you any less stupid, that's just something parents tell their children to help them deal with it. Based on the evidence at hand, i.e. the things you post, I can confirm you are, indeed, an idiot. You can flag away and get all upset, or you could try and prove me wrong by simply making more sense.
Meh. I wouldn't give this any credence yet. Twatter rumours only Henners - I know you stated that already, but it's the kind of thing that gives the Fake News! idiots ammunition if it turns out to be false
Meh. I wouldn't give this any credence yet. Twatter rumours only Henners - I know you stated that already, but it's the kind of thing that gives the Fake News! idiots ammunition if it turns out to be false
There is a picture of the van on the BBC news story online so fairly sure it's accurate...
So it turns out this may not be a leftist/liberal plot after all but the work of a hate filled right wing flat-earther. What a shock. Amazing how so many were prepared to even consider it might be otherwise. What times we live in.
Comments
Are you saying those examining these devices don't know what they are doing? Have they given them to the FBI's janitor to have a look at..?
If you hadn't put experts in inverted commas then we wouldn't be second guessing your post.
Trump is always keen on objective reporting and thought - he's not the type to go on Twitter and talk s***. He obviously wouldn't do that as he's US President.
It's important not to jump to conclusions over these packages even though most right minded people have a good idea.
Problem with society as a whole since the crash in 2008.
It's a time to be thankful.
Why not?
I blame admin.
The "I am rubber, you are glue" defence doesn't make you any less stupid, that's just something parents tell their children to help them deal with it. Based on the evidence at hand, i.e. the things you post, I can confirm you are, indeed, an idiot. You can flag away and get all upset, or you could try and prove me wrong by simply making more sense.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/26/politics/cory-booker-package/index.html