Liberal Forum

BuckNaked » 14 Jul 2023, 2:58 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 2:58 pm

jeez that doesn’t say I’m accusing Epps of sedition 

Epps hasnt Ben arrested and I posted the definition of sedition

So... you could have said that Epps hadn't been arrested and then posted the Boston Red Sox home schedule for 2023 and that would be the same thing?

got it.

two random, completely unconnected statements.

Do you have Tourette's Syndrome, perhaps?  

The photo of that guy sitting at Nancy’s desk with his feet propped up lol

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:03 pm

So... you could have said that Epps hadn't been arrested and then posted the Boston Red Sox home schedule for 2023 and that would be the same thing?

got it.

two random, completely unconnected statements.

Do you have Tourette's Syndrome, perhaps?

correct 


no



see how that works 

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:01 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:01 pm

I'd have to see the videos themselves before I answer that.

You were already shown the video, so this is just more of your dishonesty.

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:01 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:01 pm

He said, on 1/5/21 something about going into the capitol tomorrow.  As I said before, if you tell a crowd, "OK, tomorrow we're all going to go into the capitol.... but first, go home, have a nice dinner, get a good night's sleep and I'll see you all back here tomorrow.  buh bye now"  THAT is hardly "whipping up a crowd" into a riotous frenzy,  is it?

What they did was illegal, according to you.

Urging them to do it - rested or not - is then illegal, too. 

You cannot have it both ways (outside your bedroom), Groomer. 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:02 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:02 pm

Here ya go, dissembling groomer:

Many were arrested simply for going into the capitol, which, according to you, is not illegal.

Is English your second language?

Here is what you said, "The video evidence disputes your hysterical claim that everyone arrested broke down barriers."

Where in any post of mine did I claim that EVERYONE arrested broke down barriers?

Do you understand the definition of EVERYONE?


 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:04 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:04 pm

You were already shown the video, so this is just more of your dishonesty.

What they did was illegal, according to you.

Urging them to do it - rested or not - is then illegal, too. 

You cannot have it both ways (outside your bedroom), Groomer.

Urging someone to do something illegal at some point in the future is, in and of itself, an illegal act?

So... if I were to say to you, "Cannonpointer, I urge you to walk into that restaurant and take a **** on the lunch counter", and YOU DID IT, I am guilty of some illegal act?  Do tell?

BuckNaked » 14 Jul 2023, 3:04 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:04 pm

correct 

no

see how that works

What, pray tell, compelled you to put those two totally unconnected thoughts in one post without explanation as to their unconnectedness?  Damaged synapses, perhaps?

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:10 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:10 pm

Urging someone to do something illegal at some point in the future is, in and of itself, an illegal act?

Arrests of others were made for precisely that. So, according to the system you are slavishly defending, yes.
 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:04 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:04 pm

You were already shown the video, so this is just more of your dishonesty.

 

you have shown me video of Epps exhorting the crowd on January 6th?

I apologize if I missed it, but I honestly believe that the only video I have seen of him speaking to a crowd was from the day before.

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:12 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:12 pm

Arrests of others were made for precisely [sic] that. So, according to the system you are slavishly defending, yes.

lunk?
 
 

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:06 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:06 pm

Is English your second language?

Here is what you said, "The video evidence disputes your hysterical claim that everyone arrested broke down barriers."

Where in any post of mine did I claim that EVERYONE arrested broke down barriers?
 

I gave you the post. When you defended Epps not being arrested because HE didn't, you implied that everyone arrested DID. Otherwise, your post was dishonest nonsense - meaningless jabbering.

Were you posting dishonest nonsense, fruitcake? Were you meaninglessly jabbering?
 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:12 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:12 pm

Arrests of others were made for precisley that. So, according to the system you are slavishly defending, yes.

"Cannonpointer...I dare you to take a **** on a public lunch counter"

You should do it and then point to this post to get me thrown into jail just to "prove your point"!    

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:13 pm

you have shown me video of Epps exhorting the crowd 

Abbreviated to keep you honest Correct.

If I DO show you Epps doing the same on Jan 6, what will you say about it?

I'm not showing you **** just to listen to your meaningless jabber. State what it would mean if Epps did the same on J6 as on Jan 5th. 
 

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:14 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:14 pm

lunk?[sic]

Not until you tell the board what that lunk[SIC] would mean to the conversation. I've already linked proofs and received mouth **** and meaningless jabber in response. 
 
 
 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:15 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:15 pm

I gave you the post. When you defended Epps not being arrested because HE didn't, you implied that everyone arrested DID. Otherwise, your post was dishonest nonsense - meaningless jabbering.

Were you posting dishonest nonsense, fruitcake? Were you meaninglessly jabbering?

I IMPLIED nothing of the sort.  You very well may tell me what you think I INFERRED, but you cannot tell me what I implied.

Again... is English your second language.

Some people were arrested for assaulting LEO's - not breaking down barriers.  Some were arrested for destroying government property inside the congressional offices - not breaking down barriers.  I have never sain NOR IMPLIED otherwise.
 

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:18 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:18 pm

I IMPLIED nothing of the sort.  You very well may tell me what you think I INFERRED, [sic]

No, stupid. You implied. I inferred. Learn English.

maineman » 14 Jul 2023, 3:18 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:18 pm

Some people were arrested for assaulting LEO's - not breaking down barriers.  Some were arrested for destroying government property inside the congressional offices - not breaking down barriers.  I have never sain[SIC] NOR IMPLIED otherwise.

And if I show that some were arrested for their mere presence, what will that do to your narrative, dissembling jabberbot?
 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:18 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:18 pm

Not until you tell the board what that lunk[SIC] would mean to the conversation. I've already linked proofs and received mouth **** and meaningless jabber in response.

If you would give me a link that shows that people were arrested for "urging someone to do something in the future" in connection with the January 6th Insurrection and give me the USCode section under which they were charged, that would allow me to go read that section and see for myself if that particular section of the law states that "urging someone to do something in the future" is a violation of that law.

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:21 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:21 pm

And if I show that some were arrested for their mere presence, what will that do to your narrative, dissembling jabberbot?

it would reinforce my belief in karma and reaffirm my belief that it is possible to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and end up getting screwed for it.

Ashlii Babbitt being a prime example.

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2023, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2023, 3:19 pm

No, stupid. You implied. I inferred. Learn English.

You obviously can infer something that was not implied.