Nope. I have never done that unless you attacked me first. I never ever insult anyone personally unless they go there first. Prove me wrong.
Special prosecuter to look into Russia Election matter
- Thread starter goodknightfl
- Start date
Nope. I have never done that unless you attacked me first. I never ever insult anyone personally unless they go there first. Prove me wrong.
Lmao. I HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING BUT I DO ADMIT TO IT BECUASE I WAS ATTACKED!!!!!! Ahhhhhh!!!!!
I'll get right to reviewing 10 years of your posts. I'm sure you're the angel you say you are
Maybe you want to put this one down for a while. When one (or two in your case) follow script, you're kind of confirming your coursework.
Stop it with the personal attacks and insults because, you know, that's not right.
Lmao. I HAVE NEVER DONE ANYTHING BUT I DO ADMIT TO IT BECUASE I WAS ATTACKED!!!!!! Ahhhhhh!!!!!
I'll get right to reviewing 10 years of your posts. I'm sure you're the angel you say you are
Prove me wrong. I probably post as much as anyone so it should be pretty easy to find.
These, for starters. I really haven't dug all that deep. But I'm not crying about it. It might take years of therapy to get over it, however. Whatever will I do.
Joe is a leech, er, works for the government. You can probably look it up.
Joe is such a disgrace to Catholics.
I hope Joe pulls his head out of her dusty cobwebbed vag soon.
Won't waste a second watching it, but do notice Hillarys #1 fanboi @KnighttimeJoe quick munch that sandpaper ITT
Joe is the Melissa Click of UCF. Fact.
Joe is an asshole.
Last edited:
And before you go on a "well look what you did" mission, I freely admit I call you boob and needle you about living in a trailer park. I've called you stupid and borderline retarded. I've called you out on your "never Trump" and "I'll never vote for that petulant child" and all that. I've even called you fat boy. So save it.
C'mon Professor Joe, PhD. You're not going to provide the context of the threads and/or the posts I was replying to? Pretty amateur for such an educated person as yourself. I will guarantee 100% that all those posts were replies in jest or obvious sarcasm.
Go ahead and look it up. You asked, I produced. This is just laziness on your part.
OH SARCASM AND OBVIOUS JEST?!?!?!?! And mine aren't???? FFS, YOU ATTACKED ME!!!!!! I WAS ATTACKED!!!!!!
I seem to remember Joe going personal on my wife a year or so ago so please stop acting like you're somehow above anyone.
Absolutely outstanding how Gal comes back into the thread after having his ass called out numerous times.
This would be Course 2. Man, this confirmation bias really works!
Still waiting.
This would be Course 2. Man, this confirmation bias really works!
Still waiting.
Joe, please understand that you thinking you are "calling me out" is laughable to me. You're one of the last people on this board I would ever try to defend anything I posted to. When you get called out your immediate response is "do you understand the meaning of trolled" or some amateurish crap like that. You have no credibility, you come into a debate to poke and troll. When I see a post of yours, 90% of the time I just move to the next one. You add very little to any debate.
Oh and none of that changes the fact that a year or so ago you decided to actually go personal on my wife even though you have no clue as to who she is or me for that matter.
Last edited:
So it looks like you got Course 2 and 3 covered pretty well here. I add so little, but yet you spend so much time responding to me, as you are now.
And please, 85 initially called you out for taking one for the team when he surmised you married only for money. I called you Shallow Hal a few times and asked why you went hog hunting. It was inappropriate of me to do that.
Still waiting. I'll remember to turn my hearing aid up when you get around to acknowledging your BS post.
FWIW, I have to agree with Bob. Bob is really very good about being respectful unless he's attacked and it usually takes more than one post. You can usually tell if he's been drinking because his patience level goes down and will get rude way more quickly.
How would you rate your ability to stay on topic? Like the topic of Terry OD'ing on mouthwash that you claimed on page 1. You piqued my interestwith your conspiracy theory. I too found absolutely nothing to back up your claim. Can you provide any sources? Or admit it's bunk? Or admit you were wrong? Or are you just going straight to the "ignore" tactic like usual for your types on here.
Organizations could have safeguards on their systems which flag large file transfers to external drives. I know my current employer has these checks because a previous employee got in some serious trouble for transferring a ton of data to an external drive.
In any case, I think this murder is likely a gang initiation type murder. I have a hard time with the botched robbery story only because of where he was shot and the number of times.
Did your co-worker get shot in the back for that? Seems a bit harsh for data theft.
Well of course not. But they (DNC/HRC) could certainly know he has sensitive data prior to it being released by Wikileaks. It's extremely harsh for data theft, especially considering the data released from Wikileaks, as it relates to Seth Rich, has not been groundbreaking. Occams Razor would suggest his murder is coincidence and Wikileaks is attempting further their agenda.
Exactly. The stuff wasn't "bad" enough to warrant murder, even if it was Rich who leaked them.
Well, at least ya'll are still sticking to the formula I posted. Ignoring hardcore when you get called out with facts, just like you always do. Please just call me a snowflake now to finish the process.
There is apparently a hacker named Kim Dotcom who is on twitter claiming he conspired with Rich to convey the emails to WikiLeaks. With a "big announcement" coming tomorrow to prove this.
And of course Sean Hannity is running full steam ahead with this guys' tweets.
LOL. I bet this ends up being just like the guy claiming he has hard evidence of 3M illegals voting. Still waiting...
John Brennan huh?
The Russians employed hackers to dupe a moron (Podesta) and released fairly irrelevant emails via WikiLeaks.
Brennan oversaw a deliberate CIA hack into US Senate Intelligence Committee computers to steal parts of the Panetta Investigation which shed the CIA in bad light. Brennan is on record having lied about this, only to be caught lying when it was later admitted that the CIA did in fact illegally hack into Senate computers.
Which one is more damaging to our government?
The Russians employed hackers to dupe a moron (Podesta) and released fairly irrelevant emails via WikiLeaks.
Brennan oversaw a deliberate CIA hack into US Senate Intelligence Committee computers to steal parts of the Panetta Investigation which shed the CIA in bad light. Brennan is on record having lied about this, only to be caught lying when it was later admitted that the CIA did in fact illegally hack into Senate computers.
Which one is more damaging to our government?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/23/statement-on-coverage-seth-rich-murder-investigation.html
On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich. The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting. Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed.
Fox News: We made Fake News before it was cool ©
Also Gal wheres the update on the mouthwash story?
On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich. The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting. Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed.
Fox News: We made Fake News before it was cool ©
Also Gal wheres the update on the mouthwash story?
And Hannity backed off, as did the alleged source, claiming out of respect for the family. The source claimed he knew in 2015 that WikiLeaks would release emails damaging to HRC. Emails that hadn't even been written yet. Talk about prescience.
According to this source, the ball started rolling in 2014.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ts-seth-rich-leaked-podesta-wikileaks-emails/
Yeah, Kimdotcom is full of it. He's trying to create leverage for getting a plea deal for his fraud case. The reason it comes up now is because New Zealand (where he currently resides) just ruled that he can be extradited to the U.S. to face the fraud charges. He has an agenda.
That said, there are details of the Rich investigation that don't make sense. He was killed in a "botched robbery" but the police never obtained the surveillance videos from the bar he was at earlier in the night. That seems weird because a feud could have happened earlier in the evening that led to the confrontation later in the evening. At a minimum, it provides a trail of people that saw him and could give insight into any unusual actions. It seems like the DC police didn't even do due diligence to find the criminal (which is a story unto itself), but that doesn't mean there's some conspiracy surrounding his death.
Even worse. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt using his most recent date.
The weird part is that during an interview on Dutch TV, Assange implied that Seth Rich was his source and like Bob 2 said, Kimdotcom predicted it in May of 2015.
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...-be-hillary-clinton-s-worst-nightmare-in-2016
Not just implied - actually named him, something he swears he never does. He starts out implying, but then says "Seth Rich" near the end of the clip while still talking about it.
And I was being sarcastic about kim's prescience.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
OT: War in Israel 🇮🇱, Iran launches attack on Israel- Latest: Bob the Citronaut
-
NFL will allow Guardian Caps to be worn in games for first time
- Latest: brahmanknight
-
