It’s plausible deniability. It says he’s not playing ignorant, ie he knew it meant get rid of 47, or trash Trump, but he didn’t know it meant, (and having only heard back of house in restaurant biz neither did I) get violent on 47. Not sure if your question was rhetorical but it’s the best statement he could make to defend, imo. Still obvs what it means
It’s plausible deniability. It says he’s not playing ignorant, ie he knew it meant get rid of 47, or trash Trump, but he didn’t know it meant, (and having only heard back of house in restaurant biz neither did I) get violent on 47. Not sure if your question was rhetorical but it’s the best statement he could make to defend, imo. Still obvs what it means
When I worked in restaurants, 86 meant to kill any new orders for particular menu items which just sold out.
Right. I agree, but his answer says he didn’t know it related to violence…but your answer cuts to the chase…it means “kill the (order)”
You don't get to where he is without knowing what 86 means. There goes his plausible deniability.
He was the damn FBI Director. That excuse won't help him.