I take back my inferring pride on your part. Doesn't make me very proud either, actually.
As for "proof", I think you'd be surprised. Besides, there is the admissible evidence that is the body of sworn testimony he's built. Awesome. As a Bloodhound, I can tell you it's been invaluable in many respects.
I'll be surprised if has any, that's for sure.
Besides, there is the admissible evidence that is the body of sworn testimony he's built.
What sworn testimony has Larry Klayman taken concerning whether or not George Herbert Walker Bush ever met bin Laden?
And I surely do hope you don't think all "sworn testimony" is admissable evidence.