₦airaland Forum

MentalCase98:
You want that guy to flood this place with more stolen pictures from Instagram? Hahahaha.

He doesn’t know how to even steal the nice looking ones. Bragging with pictures of a dilapidated house taken from OUTSIDE

Typical of the lack of critical thinking skills you show everyday in this thread.. A+ astounding.
You're arguing that someone who owns a 300k DOLLAR car would leave their car outside in the East when the East is known for the amount of land it has and the sizes of the houses? You see lights on a wall and can't imagine it being on the inside of a property. Poverty must suck.

bemeruca:
Yeah... If you didn't think they are extraordinary you wouldn't be posting pics you found on the internet here. We saw a dirty abandoned looking compound, you saw a luxury 🤣

Professional notice me with only bicycle to show for.

Yes, the jealousy in your eyes saw an abandoned looking compound. Everyone else saw a $300,000 car driven by a detail.

Do you hear yourself? You're the same guy who went to 3rd tier school in PHC talking about you got into Harvard because of DEI. Have you ever made sense in your life?

Edit:
You and your degenerates enjoy the pics and enjoy your time here trolling. If you want more pics of me living my good life, just ask and I'll post some. No need for all these posts trying to get my attention. I know I'm the coolest person you know and when I respond to you it makes you feel better about yourself.

bemeruca:
But you stole the pic. That's your modus operandi.

Instead of worrying about my life, grow yours, so you won't think common pics are extraordinary.

MentalCase98:
It’s so obvious. I have been a silent observer of this thread for many months before I first commented and have seen several people make this same allegation about him. There is something fundamentally lacking in that boy’s life that makes him come on an anonymous Internet forum to try and prove to total strangers that he is doing well in life. It’s so bizarre.

Let’s just keep laughing at the fool and winding him up. Hopefully we can make him to drop more ridiculous pictures that always backfire on him.

Holy Obsession. Is this like 10 posts about me since I last responded to you? You must wake up in the morning thinking about me. Wow Did I trash you that badly that you came looking for more?
FYI, just pick a story. Either my compound is dirty or I stole the pics. Vacillating just makes you look like the Jealous idiot we all know you to be.
It is sad to see a grown man with gray hairs so scared of someone they create aliases of aliases just to write post after post about them.
Congrats man. You're momsie must be proud. You are NairaLand's Troll Champion #1. Lol..
Lol at you and your ilk, "the mods cannot ban me and succeed." Lol Those are some stellar life achievements. Make sure you put them on your gravestones.

budaatum:
If you are shocked that some believe the alternative facts dump feeds them then I'm afraid it's you who don't believe what you see with your own eyes.

This poll says it all. Clinton was right. The GOP is a party of deplorables.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/31/trump-ahead-of-desantis-poll-finds-00108949

Obrigardo:
I have a hunch you are the serial troll who's that drug and prôstitution addict. Or worse ben the black man hater.

I think you are quite mentally unbalanced.

Braniackx stop dignifying this troll with your response. He'll soon let his guard down and we will find out and ban him again.

Been thinking the same. It's unfortunate grown men with gray hairs prance around online creating multiple usernames and bragging about it as if it's their life achievement.

basilico:
Trump said it was a bundle of newspaper clippings.
The charge is that he is on tape saying he did not declass it. That does not mean he was waving it to his biographer or whoever was in the meeting.
The Iran doc is not part of the 31 counts.

Ijeboss. The judge wanted a special master to go through the docs inorder to determine if they were classified. DoJ appealed to a higher court which ruled that the docs could only be reviewed by them...The DoJ does not seem even willing to share the docs with Trump and his lawyers. It's for them to declare that the docs are highly classified No other person should review.
They would obviously say this because the docs expose how FBI blatantly pushed fwd with Russia hoax knowing it was a lie concocted by Hillary campaign.

As for deleting, Trump has said the SC was given all the footage.He told someone that he wanted the footage deleted, but it was not. That telling someone is now a conspiracy charge.

When Trump talks SC looks for any statute that can indict him.

Hell they were even questioning his closest aides about whether he believed Joe Biden won. In other words looking for anything he said to charge him with rejecting election results. Don't you know that doubting election results is a danger to democracy?

Listen you still haven't read the indictment. How do I know? Because you keep making statements that are contrary to it. One example, the "Iran document" you claimed wasn't charged, was charged in Count 32 of the superseding indictment. The two images below are from the superseding indictment.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/US-v-Trump-Nauta-De-Oliveira-23-80101.pdf

And these aren't kid games. Not only do they have a recording of that actual meeting, they most likely have a witness or witnesses who will testify that he was waving around the classified document they charged him on.

There is no point engaging with you if you can't bother to do it in an honest way by actually familiarizing yourself with the stuff you are discussing.

basilico:
Hypothetically. If the investigation by FBI on JFK death pointed to CIA, would classifying the investigation be an act to protect the state security? Or it would be to cover the crimes committed by those criminals ?
II do hope we can agree that esp FBI does classify docs to protect their own crimes.

Documents when declassified should be made available to the public pronto. Public document releases should not be stonewalled, at least that's my understanding.

Have you heard of Occam's razor. You seem to always construct the most elaborate conspiracy to explain anything. Start with the simplest answer and if it doesn't make sense or you get new data, then move on to something more complex. If any of those documents pointed to Government malfeasance, why didn't Trump reveal i?. In fact knowing Trump, if there was even an iota of anything improper, he would have been hyping it from now till kingdom come. It would have became the GREATEST CRIME EVER.

The documents weren't declassified. The documents were not supposed to have been declassified. Some are being declassified now and may be shown in court because Trump let them be public. By doing so he most likely already shut down/put in danger whatever sources and methods they relied on.

BraniacX:
said the dumbo to the book, "why all these inked scratches on your pages?" 🤣😅 no one is expecting you to appreciate what you're shamelessly incapable of comprehending benalvino and the fact that you can't comprehend it doesn't invalidate it's quality and aesthetics 😎 and as a typical republican supporter you want issues to be dumbed down to your level so you can comprehend🤣 your motto is now "dumb and proud"

"Dumb and proud" is the Republican motto. Propagating a disdain for education is a surefire way for people in Power to keep the status quo. And uneducated Republicans lap it up.

basilico:
While I look to answer you, let's start from my slate which I doubt you are aware.

Trump declassed some docs before leaving WH.Mostly about the Russian hoax. NARA wanted every document created from Jan 2017 till his last day.Meaning they wanted docs implicatting DoJ, FBI and CIA in pushing the hoax

Mar a Lago search. They took away 13000 documents. They claim they found 102 documents that DoJ said had classification markings or were classified. Having classification markings is not the same as classified documents. Trump was indicted on 31 counts plus other 6 .Why not 102? Maybe the other 71 contain evidence that the fbi and DoJ are criminal mafia orgs.
Which comes to this. Under the Presidential Records Act.was Trump doing anything remotely illegal?

Says whom? You've repeatedly stated things but haven't posted anything to back them up.
Whenever I make a point I try to always post the original source document or a well sourced article. So, for every argument you've just made, post the source you got it from. I'll even accept the National Review or Wall Street Journal as sources (not their editorial section), though I wouldn't regularly trust their reporting.

I do get the question of the Counts. In US courts, if they are charging a Count based on a document, they have to declassify that document and then show it to the Jury. This works in Trump's favor as a lot of this stuff was HIGHLY classified (only a select group people saw some of them). So, the Prosecution has to decide which documents they can show and are willing to let the public see. This isn't unique. In some cases, they don't even prosecute or prosecute for lesser crimes because they are unwilling to show the documents. And also it's not unique not to charge for every count you can charge. Happens all the time in US courts. I mean if each count has a 5 year sentence(not sure that is the number) and Trump is in his late 70's. Don't you think those 31 counts are sufficient?

Again, you still haven't shown you've read or understood the Presidential Records Act. Why would you argue something you haven't read?

And lastly, whether he classified it or didn't classify it or even whether he thought he owned or actually did own it doesn't matter. The minute you get a valid subpoena, you have to turn everything over. It's not a choice or an option. Unfortunately for Trump, they worded the subpoena to request for "any document with a classification marking". If a document was supposedly declassified and still had it's markings, he hard to turn them over. He didn't. So, he is looking at Obstruction of Justice at the minimum.

bemeruca:
Burden of proof is on those who make a claim. The controversy to begin is based on a lie from dems like no lie with...

So, why don't you post the facts since you like to utter the word google.

You hate black people on the right, most of the people whose boot you lick are white dems... You will be the first to shout coon because they gave you DEI in Harvard making you a dumb graduate with a Harvard degree you think you are useful. Nothing to show for except drinking cokes in the bar of a hotel or posting peoples property here claiming it is yours.

Remain a token nigga... At least the racist libs will point their fingers at you and shout "I have a black friend"

This is some incoherent shit. Are you having a stroke?
It's like you bashed on the keyboard while using some words you don't quite understand.

Good Reporting.
https://dnyuz.com/2023/07/28/the-shady-backstory-of-floridas-outrageous-new-slavery-curriculum/

wirinet:
You have time to be responding to him. He says the most stupid things in his rabid defense of Trump. How can the presidential records act say a president can keep any government documents he likes? The presidential records act was referring to incumbent presidents. Where there is a dispute in the presidential records act is personal documents/records of the president and not nuclear secrets or military documents. The law can never mandate all former presidents take all government documents as his personal property.

I honestly believe Basilico's life is tied to the defense of Trump. He says one thing, if that thing is debunked, he jumps unto another, and so on. Then a few weeks later he starts the cycle again with the same debunked claim. He says Trump was showing newspaper clipping and not actual Iran invasion plans, once that has been debunked, he switches to Trump had declassified the documents (a claim that Trump's lawyers refused to present in court), if if it was debunked that there is no evidence Trump declassified the documents, he then switches to whataboutism and 2 tier justice system.

Reading his desperation at grasping any straw to defend Trump is annoying.

Lol. It's that part of me that wants to see the better angels in people.
I read this great article about speaking with people like him (MAGAS in the cult). The article's gist was basically that you can't persuade them with facts and logic but you can help them by helping them get better sources of information. So, I assume I'd prod him to actually read the stuff himself in hopes he learns how to research and ferret out the implicit biases in the things he reads.

But, the sad thing is that this stuff comes from people who know better. I try to read the National Review weekly to understand the perspective of those on the Right. National Review because unlike Fox News I thought it catered to the "intellectual" side of the Right. Holy Shit. Reading the stuff on that site by people who are intelligent and know better was alarming. They are paid to make up any argument no matter how weak or contradictory for whatever agenda they are pushing. And they do so with the supposed "qualifications" of Harvard/Yale Law Degrees or top government positions etc. Like Bill Barr. So, part of me feels a little sorry for some of the people who who buy it. It'd be hard to believe that you are being purposefully manipulated daily by the stuff you read and hear. Just like that Hunter Biden article that purposefully and erroneously said the judge rejected his plea deal that people here repeatedly reposted.

bemeruca:
Lmao... You post a tweet from a known libtard with no proof of what he claimed. Sanpipita... You will never change. You are okay with biden deciding who is black. You are a serious token nig. Lol

Just like the don't say gay bill lie... You libtards are on another one.

You are playing your deaf dumb and blind game again. If the tweet is factually wrong you would have googled it and pointed it out. It's not, so instead it's a "liberal" tweet.
Why do you even post here?
You're such a coon that you defend the shit that Actual Republican coons won't defend. Like I keep saying you're a trash person.

basilico:
I have read Jackboots indictment.
He says Trump posseses documents he is not supposed to have and charges him for espionage... 31 counts.
What about the Presidential Records Act? Under that Act I do believe the president is entitled to keep any documents he sees fit Jackboot looked for a loophole to charge him
The other counts are based on what he told his lawyer, his lawyers notes who was forced to be a prosecution witness. If Trump told his lawyer that he wanted to burn the WHouse , Jackboot would have indicted Trump on conspiracy to damage property.

Step 1: Post the actual statutes he was indicted on from the indictment and superseding indictment.
Step 2: Post the the Section from the Presidential Records Act that says the president can keep any document he sees fit. You'll probably bring up the Clinton Socks case. So also link to the ruling/holding of that case. Quote the holding and then quote the place where you think that ruling entitles Trump to keep the Records.

I am telling you that what you wrote/write sound like gibberish. Do those Steps above and you'll also agree what you wrote sounds like gibberish. Do the Steps above and you'll be in a sufficiently knowledgeable place that I'll engage you in the rest.

And FYI, you haven't read the indictments. Your posts say so.

basilico:
He said he has classified docs.Was he joking, did he give anyone to go through it? I highly doubt he had anything, which he knew was top secret and let anyone peruse it.

New indictment.. He wanted to delete the tapes, he did not. Charge..conspiracy to obstruct or cause someone to obstruct.
Actual obstruction NEVER happened. All tapes were handed over.
Has the particular document been produced, or it's too top secret for anyone apart from DoJ to see it?

Looks like if Trump expresses something, he is indicted for it.
For instance he said "I can't believe Biden really beat me"
And now they will indict him for that...saying that he told his aides privately that he lost, but telling the public that he won.

What kinda justice is that
The 33-377 charges in Jackboot case stem from what he told he told his lawyer. The lawyer was forced to be a prosecution witness.

You haven't read the original indictment.
You haven't read the superseding indictment.
But, you spend a good amount of time writing these posts about them.
FYI, you could be a better sycophant if you actually took that time and read the indictments, actually knew what Trump is accused of doing or not doing and what witnesses and evidence the prosecutors have.
That way you would know the facts and be able to spin them without looking totally foolish.
They are easy reads; read them.

sanpipita:
Coonery is bad business.

I thought Black conservatives said blacks should move on from slavery and stop playing victims.

Lol.
Imagine, a week ago the coons in this thread were defending Desantis.

basilico:
Ijeboss.
Very interesting on Secret Service protection.
If Trump is jailed would he have secret service guarding him in the cells?

Kennedy Jnr , Biden main Demonrat opponent has been denied secret service protection by Joe Biden admin.

When crackhead Hunter appeared in court this week , he had secret service protection and a six vehicle motorcade.

If you spent some time googling you could figure out why Hunter and RFK are not similar situations. The Secret Service protects all the President's family. All Trump's Children had secret service protection even for at least 6 months after he left office.

They may protect a presidential candidate but that is the decision of Homeland Security based on a memo they put out in 2020. Two things I see off the bat, he's not polling at 15% for 30 days and he's not in a competitive Primary (the President if running for reelection generally gets the nomination of that party). So, it's not really competitive. Everything isn't a far fetched conspiracy.

https://www.secretservice.gov/protection/leaders/campaign-2020

These factors include, but are not limited to:
Whether the candidate has publicly announced his or her candidacy and has filed the appropriate documentation with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and is in compliance with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, and related laws;
Whether the candidate is actively campaigning on a national basis for the office for which his or her candidacy has been announced, as demonstrated by operating a national campaign apparatus, regularly appearing at public events in multiple states, producing and publishing campaign advertisements, and other similar indicia of a campaign;
A threat assessment conducted by the Secret Service of general or specific threats directed towards the candidate. (for these purposes, “threats” should be defined as explicit threats of bodily harm to the candidate or indications of inappropriate behavior towards the candidate suggesting potential bodily harm);
Whether, during and within an active and competitive major party primary , the most recent average of established national polls, as reflected by the Real Clear Politics National Average or similar mechanism, the candidate is polling at 15% or more for 30 consecutive days;
Whether the candidate is the formal or de facto nominee of a major party for President or Vice President;
Whether the candidate is an independent or third party candidate for President polling at 20% or more of the Real Clear Politics National Average for 30 consecutive days;
Whether the candidate is the Vice Presidential running mate of the above independent or third party candidate

But Trump's Secret Service protection is interesting. By law, he is supposed to get protection for life. So, from my understanding, if he is incarcerated he would have to get protection unless they change the law. That's why I don't believe he will go to jail. Will be easier to sentence him to home arrest. Will seem unfair, but will be practical.

Trump's former Lawyer Ty Cobb on the new superseding indictment.

“The original indictment was engineered to last a thousand years and now this superseding indictment will last an antiquity.
This is such a tight case, the evidence is so overwhelming.”


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blWCQGNENwE

MentalCase98:
😂😂😂 fanboy? Dude you are the one who literally started this engagement when you mentioned me and have dropped like 7 epistles (most of which I didn’t even read) about me since then.

I swear are you even a real person? Sometimes you type like ChatGPT on crack. All the while I’m just laughing at you while you keep getting emotional.

Go seek the urgent mental help you badly need bro. There is something fundamentally broken in your life that makes you this emotional with strangers in nairaland. I don’t know if it’s a parent thing? But something’s definitely off with you bro.

Mr. Fanboy, so you read it or didn't read it? Make up your mind what lie you want to go with.
I get it, you only "read" the parts that don't require you to admit that you were made the fool and posted lies from a publication that publishes lies because they believe the people who read them are uneducated fools. Lol

So, instead of admitting a fault you'll suddenly get that deaf, dumb and blind disease you and your MAGA brethren seem to get when you're called out on your fables. My fault, the dumb part isn't sudden and it's not just a fault of yourself, but of your stars.

FYI, just cuz you keep my name in your mouth doesn't mean you'll ever be me or similar to me and just because I take the time to trash you doesn’t mean we'd ever be in the same circles in the real world.

I guess verbally beaten you down wasn't boring after all. Let's see how many more posts you pen referencing me Mr. Fanboy.

You can't make this up.

Obrigardo:
If this was anyone who tried to delete evidence to evade the prosecutors, he will be in jail at this moment, even before they even charge him to court. Criminal trump keeps flinging disgusting vermin and lies, while he is still a free man and idiotic fellows think the criminal is spotless innocent. Any other person would be in JAIL right about now.

The details in this new indictment.

MentalCase98:
Mr. Harvard. In case they didn’t teach you this there; a paragraph should have a MAXIMUM of 5 lines. This makes it much easier for people to read or take your post serious. But of course you’re a liar who has never been to Harvard 🤥

A paragraph should have a maximum of 5 lines? Bwahahahahh.. lol. Where do I even begin. Did whatever you googled have more than 4 lines and you stopped reading? Lol
I think you meant 5 sentences. Yes, great prose is very formulaic. That was sarcasm... you may have missed it given your mental limitations. You might have learned what a good paragraph entails if you had finished school.

Think about this. You spent all this time spinning like a top making yourself look more of the fool instead of admitting you were fooled and posted misinformation. You're a really stupid person. An A+ idiot. But, lucky for you, at this point I feel like I'm bullying you ad picking on someone who rides the short bus. It's getting boring. So, I'll get back to ignoring you. You can continue stalking and obsessing over me like the fanboy you are.

basilico:
Simpleton. This is my understanding.
Hunter Biden lawyers had crafted a deal where tax evasion ( eventually paid) was reduced to two misdemeanors
And for the gun charge Hunter was to be on good behavior for two years.
Judge wanted to know whether other charges would be forthcoming ie FARA.. which directly connect to his dad.
Prosecution said case was ongoing. Hunter Biden lawyer were aghast.
Turns out the deal was Hunter to go jail free if he pled to two misdemeanors AND immunity on any future charges to be brought along.
Judge saw thru.. they wanted her to accept the plea deal that would have ensured no more investigations of Hunter esp on FARA .

I don't care about your "understanding" and I wasn't talking to you. Wait your turn.
And while you are waiting. Here is the link for the court transcript of the hearing.
https://media.marcopolousa.org/pdf/20230726hearingtranscript.pdf
Read it and for every line you wrote above, copy and paste her exact words pertaining to it. Then and only then will I think about responding to you. But of course I won't need to because you should be able to to tell at that point that most of what you wrote is BS.

MentalCase98:
Ehen! This is much more like it. 4 lines, succinct and comprehensible. Easy for me to read and digest.

Although you’re still taking shit not worth responding to but this will at least get you a response.

You see not everything is taught at “Harvard”?


Learn to make your point as concise as possible without rambling like a jobless fool.

Ahahahahahhaha
You are here arguing that something has to be 4 lines to be comprehensible?
Benalvino3 argues that he needs a dictionary to understand some of these posts?
I'm embarrassed that you're Nigerian and proud of your ignorance.
No wonder your posts are filled with images. Reading is hard for you.
Trump does love his stupid people. Lol.

This is one of your 100 usernames innit? Makes sense. If maybe you had finished school understanding posts 5 lines or longer wouldn't be a problem.

timesup234:
Brainwashed! The best thing that happened to me is dropping out of school in my 200level . School is stupidity until proven otherwise. Nobody should be proud of going to school.

Mr Troll Champion #1.

MentalCase98:
Didn’t read this either. You have a serious problem with being succinct. It’s a sign of poor education and joblessness. Go get a life please. There’s more to life than sucking Bidens anus all over the internet.

Don't run away. Tell me again how the Judge rejected Hunter's deal. Tell me how that belief fits with her f'king WORDS . Or just be a man and admit you were fooled again like the FOOL you are.

MentalCase98:
Didn’t read this either. You have a serious problem with being succinct. It’s a sign of poor education and joblessness. Go get a life please. There’s more to life than sucking Bidens anus all over the internet.

Bwahahaha. He said, "I came onto an online forum to not read the post I am replying to." Ahhahahah Peculiar all the posts you don't "read" call you out on the Bullshit you write.

Is that your "stick your hand in your ears and cover your eyes while saying I can't hear you" defense? Lol.
Mr. "Naijaland Troll Champion of the 100 pseudo accounts because they take 2 minutes to create" talking about getting a life. #LifeinanAlternateReality

budaatum:
Wsj

Here is the court transcript. And below a portion of what she actually said.
https://media.marcopolousa.org/pdf/20230726hearingtranscript.pdf

MentalCase98:
Confirmed. They clearly don’t teach summarization at “Harvard”. Who do you think is going to follow you and read this lengthy garbage that you just posted during business hours? I said before that this guy is jobless.

I assume anyone who comes on a forum to discuss things and not just to troll would take the time to read that.

I'm confused. Are you arguing I spend more or less time on this forum than you? There is actually a metric on this site that tells us the answer to that. You want to compare. I'll do a spreadsheet later in the day when I have more time.

Lol at this idiot saying 7am in the US is business hours. Let me ask you what time is in Nigeria right now? Lol.. I assume it's actually business hours. What do you do that allows you to be this stupid? Who hires someone like you?

Yes, they did teach summarization. Also thought writing in complete sentences and accurately, fully expressing your point logically, knowing which sources to trust, finding biases in the things you read, doing your own research and providing your sources. What college did you graduate from and what did they teach you there?

[quote author=MentalCase98 post=124683953][/quote]Wow. This headline is astonishing in the fact that it is factually wrong. Whoever wrote this should have had access to one of the court reporters who took summarized/transcribed the hearing. And whatever editor read this before allowing it to go to print, should have known the headline was factually inaccurate as well. So, the takeaway is they intentionally/knowingly wrote this slanted article with an inaccurate misleading headline to propagandize to it's uneducated I assume Conservative readers. Is this was newspapers are really doing in 2023? Lying and causing division in order to make a buck?>

And low and behold I'm sure the Mental idiot that this poster is probably sought a headline that aligned with his believes. Didn't care that other headlines from more prestigious papers were different. Didn't care to research it himself to figure out the discrepancy. But chose instead to 100% buy into this alternate reality.

The Facts: The judge did not reject this deal. She in fact made a point of saying she was neither going to accept or reject it today. How do I know, because I actually read through one of the partial transcripts one of the in-court reporters posted. And one of the big reasons the Judge didn't was she believed there may be a separation of powers issues (Constitutional). Part of the plea deal for the gun case called for her to be the final arbiter of whether Hunter Biden broke the terms. Then and only then could the prosecutors bring charges. Now, I get why Hunter Bidens team did this. They don't want future Prosecutors (aka a Republican) to come in say he broke the deal and throw him in Jail. They would rather have a Judge review it and put that decision in the hands of a Judge. The Prosecutors and Biden were both Ok with that arrangement. But the judge argued that a Judge making the decision would make them a "gatekeeper" of Criminal charges. And only the Executive Branch can bring charges not the Judicial thereby violating the Constitution. She asked them to brief her further on the matter or maybe just adjust that element of it. And thus the reason she could neither approve or reject it. Rather technical, and for rabid braindead Conservatives not as good a narrative as the Judge declined the "sweetheart deal".

Again, you don't have to believe me. Just find a court reporter who transcribed the hearing and read it for yourself. It's not magic, it's literally the words that came out of the Judge's mouth.

It's crazy that Conservatives take advantage of the illiterate like MentalCase98.

Edit: Found the court transcript on Twitter. I also posted the portion of her exact words which you can compare to the article headline.
https://media.marcopolousa.org/pdf/20230726hearingtranscript.pdf

bemeruca:
Your quote makes no sense. So did she grant him the plea deal?

Here you are commencing your backpedaling/goal post shifting as usual. She did not strike down the deal as you posted. What I quoted is her exact quote. If you can't understand it, that's on YOU. If you want to actually know what she did find a reliable source like I did and read about it.