Keith Boykin: I Don’t Buy the Argument that a Ballroom Must Sit on Top of a Secure Facility

BOYKIN: “But in court documents, they make the argument that they needed the structure above it to sit on top of what was below it. Like they could not have it. The part under underground be exposed and not have a ballroom. That‘s kind of crazy. Like that‘s not I don‘t I don‘t buy that argument that they have to have a ballroom on top of it. You could go further down, whatever the case.”May be, but I fully buy the argument. You have. >> A structure, right? Right, right. But they said they said they had to have a ballroom on top of it in order to sit on top of the.”

FindClipsBankNewsBaseRadioBankPodBankTranscriptBankPhotoBankPrintBankClipLiveClipperNewsClipperTVClipperWebClipperRadioClipperPodClipperGifCreatorNewsMonitorCityMonitorShareUploadGifsGalleryLiveShareShowCasterAboutNewsHow-ToRSSLoginRegisterNewsListsClips

Keith Boykin: I Don’t Buy the Argument that a Ballroom Must Sit on Top of a Secure Facility‘That‘s kind of crazy’News & PoliticsRUSH EXCERPT:BOYKIN: “But in court documents, they make the argument that they needed the structure above it to sit on top of what was below it. Like they could not have it. The part under underground be exposed and not have a ballroom. That‘s kind of crazy. Like that‘s not I don‘t I don‘t buy that argument that they have to have a ballroom on top of it. You could go further down, whatever the case.”May be, but I fully buy the argument. You have. >> A structure, right? Right, right. But they said they said they had to have a ballroom on top of it in order to sit on top of the.”Video filesFullCompactSort byDateSummaryRelevancePopularityPer page81216Audio filesFullCompactSort byDateSummaryRelevancePopularityPer page81216Recipient e-mailMessage (optional)Preview

Source: Grabien Stories