Uhh, the part where that was the CIA's original stance, which Clinton relied on. Doubling down over and over again on you not having read anything on the topic.... doesn't actually constitute an argument. Are you asking to be simultaneously educated on the topic and have your nonsensical non-points debunked?
Regardless of what you intended, the only thing that deserves laughter is you being too spectacularly retarded to understand that your stance has been undercut even by Republican hacks who were forced to clear her of any supposed wrongdoing -- that reflects only on you. Your willful ignorance doesn't constitute an argument.Originally Posted by Methais
If you'd read it, you wouldn't be sitting here saying "tell me more about what's in the report."Originally Posted by Methais