From: Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics
Subject: Re: Damn... This Dude's Stupid - Thinks A Directive Can "Undertake
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 19:31:18 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 2024-10-03 19:19, AlleyCat wrote:
>
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 19:05:51 -0700, Alan says...
>
>>
>> On 2024-10-03 19:02, AlleyCat wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 18:38:03 -0700, Alan says...
>>>
>>>>> Transcripts Show President Trump's Directives to Pentagon Leadership to "Keep January 6 Safe" Were Deliberately Ignored
>>>>> - September 20, 2024
>>>>
>>>> But we're talking about a directive you claim exists that omitted facts
>>>> about January 6
>>>
>>> Jes.
>>>
>>> Wait... no.
>>>
>>> It isn't "about" Jan. 6.
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> Then why was this the subject of the first post of this thread:
>>
>> 'New House Committee Docs Reveal Dodd Concealed Trump's J6 Request For
>> Nat'l Guard'
>>
>> So what Department of Defense Directive was written omitting facts about J6?
>
> How many have you read?
>
> How many ARE there?
>
> LOL
>
> BOY! You are stupid.
>
> Pick the one you can't prove a negative on.
That would be the POINT of not being able to prove a negative, Pussey.
I could read a thousand DoD directives and you'd just insist I hadn't
read the right one.
But let's deal with the claim you made just a post ago:
'It isn't "about" Jan. 6.'
But your subject line for the first post of this thread was:
'New House Committee Docs Reveal Dodd Concealed Trump's J6 Request For
Nat'l Guard'
So I'll ask again:
What DoD directive are you claiming was missing facts about 'J6 Request
For Nat'l Guard'?