Child Groomer, Sexual Predator
59,315 posts
Huey » 02 Mar 2022, 3:21 pm » wrote: ↑
None of those support your case. They were made AFTER the other one's.
Plus:
1. The narrative was under attack. No need to qualifier.
2. That is what the thread was about. No need to qualify. Particularly since I did it multiple times prior.
3. Your **** vindicated comment was in response to this:
You lose.
2. That is what the thread was about. No need to qualify. Particularly since I did it multiple times prior.
Natch..
when you're everywhere that you're not.