Liberal Forum

Huey » 09 Sep 2026, 6:24 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 6:24 am

ABC and George have 16 million reasons to say you are an idiot.

No, they don't..

As I have explained..
You can't tell me why they matter.
 

BV is just a **** pos liberal shill

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 6:27 am

No, they don't..

As I have explained..
You can't tell me why they matter.
 

 

One time and one time only.  Jeez, you are **** retarded.  They are relevant because they settled a liable case for claiming Trump was civilly liable for rape for 16 million dollars.  A guest on a show went down the same road and the host corrected him to spare the network a lawsuit.

Now it is your turn to explain why it is not relevant.  Acknowledge you were answered. 

Huey » 09 Sep 2026, 6:35 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 6:35 am

One time and one time only.  Jeez, you are **** retarded.  They are relevant because they settled a liable case for claiming Trump was civilly liable for rape for 16 million dollars.  A guest on a show went down the same road and the host corrected him to spare the network a lawsuit.

Now it is your turn to explain why it is not relevant.  Acknowledge you were answered.

I have explained this several times..

What Stephanopoulos said is TECHNICALLY false.


Had he said

"...found liable for an act defined as rape. The term used to describe someone who commits such an act is "Rapist"."

There would have been no issue.

As it was, it isn't at all clear whether Grifty would have met the requirements for a defamation or libel claim.

For reasons you don't have the essentials to comprehend. 

Were I you, I'd hide out at the other place for a while..

****'s about to get ugly at the Rosen thread...



 

BV will NEVER do this...

Now it is your turn to explain why it is not relevant. Acknowledge you were answered.

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 6:50 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 6:50 am

I have explained this several times..

What Stephanopoulos said is TECHNICALLY false.


Had he said

"...found liable for an act defined as rape. The term used to describe someone who commits such an act is "Rapist"."

There would have been no issue.

As it was, it isn't at all clear whether Grifty would have met the requirements for a defamation or libel claim.

For reasons you don't have the essentials to comprehend. 

Were I you, I'd hide out at the other place for a while..

****'s about to get ugly at the Rosen thread...



 

 

He was found liable for sexual assualt, NOT RAPE, according to the Jury and NY STATE LAW.

It didn't get ugly for me on the Rosen thread.  YOU have nothing but speculation.  

Additionally, whenever you start a SECOND THREAD on a topic already under discussion it is a sign you are getting your *** beat and you wish to reframe.  


 

Huey » 09 Sep 2026, 6:56 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 6:56 am

He was found liable for sexual assualt, 

It didn't get ugly for me on the Rosen thread.  YOU have nothing but speculation.  

Additionally, whenever you start a SECOND THREAD on a topic already under discussion it is a sign you are getting your *** beat and you wish to reframe.

He was found liable for a SPECIFIC ACT of sexual assault.

Unless you read the opinion, you must shut the **** up.

It didn't get ugly for me on the Rosen thread.  YOU have nothing but speculation.  

Tiny,

I'm the one with the citations and facts.

And I have nailed every element of it...

But now it will get Unspeakably Cruel.

With receipts..

May call for a dedicated thread..

Another day, another humiliating context.
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 7:10 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:10 am

He was found liable for a SPECIFIC ACT of sexual assault.

Unless you read the opinion, you must shut the **** up.



Tiny,

I'm the one with the citations and facts.

And I have nailed every element of it...

But now it will get Unspeakably Cruel.

With receipts..

May call for a dedicated thread..

Another day, another humiliating context.
 

 

Yeah, you were so **** up you had to start a second thread.

Well, I'm out.  If you are going to allow this to degenerate into you usual **** trash talk, bye.  


 

Huey » 09 Sep 2026, 7:13 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:13 am

Yeah, you were so **** up you had to start a second thread.

Well, I'm out.  If you are going to allow this to degenerate into you usual **** trash talk, bye.

How much of the citation in the second thread have you read?

We know it is less than all.

Well, I'm out.  If you are going to allow this to degenerate into you usual **** trash talk, bye.

I suggested you do that earlier...

But it's not as if you can hope to hide from your stupid.
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 7:18 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:18 am

How much of the citation in the second thread have you read?

We know it is less than all.


I suggested you do that earlier...

But it's not as if you can hope to hide from your stupid.
 

 

Are we gonna talk about the issue?

The answer is all of it.  Acknowledge you were answered.

You never do. 
 

Huey » 09 Sep 2026, 7:20 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:20 am

Are we gonna talk about the issue?

The answer is all of it.  Acknowledge you were answered.

You never do.

That's why asked how much of the source materials, reporting the facts, you have read.

The answer is all of it.  Acknowledge you were answered.

If so, is there a concession you would like to offer lest you find yourself, once again, bobbing limbless in a pool of your own waste?

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 7:32 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:32 am

That's why asked how much of the source materials, reporting the facts, you have read.




If so, is there a concession you would like to offer lest you find yourself, once again, bobbing limbless in a pool of your own waste?

 

First, acknowledge you were answered and I will think of a question to ask you while waiting.  This way you can't lie any more about me not ever answering questions.

Oh, and stop talking about what you are gonna do, Tuco.  Just do it.
 

Huey » 09 Sep 2026, 7:37 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:37 am

First, acknowledge you were answered and I will think of a question to ask you while waiting.  This way you can't lie any more about me not ever answering questions.

Oh, and stop talking about what you are gonna do, Tuco.  Just do it.

Not there yet.

Can you tell me when you finished reading the article?
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 7:42 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:42 am

Not there yet.

Can you tell me when you finished reading the article?
 

 

I'm done.  

Huey » 09 Sep 2026, 7:58 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 7:58 am

I'm done.

I'll be taking care of that shortly.

When did you finish reading the citation?
 

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 6:27 am

No, they don't..

As I have explained..
You can't tell me why they matter.
 

Nobody can tell you anything that is physically absolute and self evident when you choose to believe anything else is possible socially when people agree to disagree about the same physical absolute self evidently separating each ancestor alive today.

Genetic outcomes of each incoming reproduction of each ancestral linage and their current generation gaps living daily here spontaneously inhabiting time simultaneously existing in plain sight in chronological order of biologically here since conception by prior generation gaps combined.

Blackvegetable » 09 Sep 2026, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2026, 6:27 am

No, they don't..

As I have explained..
You can't tell me why they matter.

omg your right they don’t 

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2026, 11:44 am » wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2026, 11:44 am

Are

Serious question, brownie,

you aware that you're an idiot?
 

Blackvegetable » 07 Sep 2026, 11:39 am » wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2026, 11:39 am

Save time...

Run now.

You know you'll do so..

we have the goods brown…no running necessary…
 

Blackvegetable » 06 Sep 2026, 7:41 pm » wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2026, 7:41 pm

So why does this matter? It matters because Mr. Trump now contends that the jury’s $2 million compensatory damages award for Ms. Carroll’s sexual assault claim was excessive because the jury concluded that he had not “raped” Ms. Carroll.5 Its verdict, he says, could have been based upon no more than “groping of [Ms. Carroll’s] breasts through clothing or similarconduct, which is a far cry from rape.”6 And while Mr. Trump is right that a $2 million award for such groping alone could well be regarded as excessive, that undermines rather than supports his argument. His argument is entirely unpersuasive.

cling, brown…like you always do, putrid stink to ****…