Joe did not confirm these photos exist, he did acknowledge that it had been relayed to him they exist. He stands firm on trust, but verify, which is an important aspect of honing policy decisions.
It’s possible it was a result of his diagnosed stutter, he’s not exactly the most eloquent speaker I’ll admit, but it’d be wrong to judge someone based on a speech impediment.
If you could define bit like I asked, maybe I could inform you if this equates it? I’m really just trying to get people to use reason and logic to draw conclusions and present those in public discourse. Does that match the definition?
Joe did not confirm these photos exist, he did acknowledge that it had been relayed to him they exist. He stands firm on trust, but verify, which is an important aspect of honing policy decisions.
Joe claimed to have seen the pictures
He either misspoke or straight up lied because he said he saw the pictures, not he was told pictures exist or the picture was described to him.
It’s possible it was a result of his diagnosed stutter, he’s not exactly the most eloquent speaker I’ll admit, but it’d be wrong to judge someone based on a speech impediment.
Laughing at a disability is not something you should take lightly.
Excellent, I’ll laugh with you! Laughter produces endorphins and may contribute to more positive input. This community is quite hostile!
I hope you’re laughing, cause this has to be a bit
I refuse to believe you’re serious and not a bit. No one could seriously talk like this let alone believe what they’re saying
If you could define bit like I asked, maybe I could inform you if this equates it? I’m really just trying to get people to use reason and logic to draw conclusions and present those in public discourse. Does that match the definition?