Liberal Forum

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 10:22 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:22 am

Are you incapable of dealing with a paragraph or two of text?

• Despite the claims of Greasy Joe, it appears he was actually in possession of classified and highly classified material, some of which was listed as top secret
• He was never in a political position where he was authorised to even view such material - much less take possession of it
• Also, despite his claims, it was not all secured in lock-up cabinets, as even the highest levels of intellectual dishonesty CNN has to offer, would struggle to list Joe's garage floor as a lock-up cabinet (there are photos).

When you look at it like that, paragraph one was nothing but a series of bullet points. What aspect are you struggling with?

• Greasy Joe was fully aware he had this stuff - he'd possessed it for years - it was not volunteered for surrender in all that time

The rest is paragraph 2 is admittedly narrative.

, it appears

Not here to address this ****.


And I'll explain why...

It "appears" to you....suggesting that my job is to convince you that you are wrong.

Since it isn't about specifics, what are the odds that you will acknowledge that your vision thing has mislead you?

For example, what do you know about the "willfully withheld" materials in question?

How is thr report defining "willful retention" in this instance?

 

Beekeeper » 11 Feb 2024, 10:35 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:35 am

I didn't vote for the dementia riddled bye-DUMB, that would be YOU!! And that one single point alone PROVES YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A **** PIECE OF PIG **** MORON!!!

You voted for a rapist facing 91 criminal counts.

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 10:41 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:41 am

You voted for a rapist facing 91 criminal counts.

I take it '91 criminal counts' is your new redundant **** that you will repeat daily for the next 4 years now. 

Always the same **** with you. And he wonders why I have 100% accuracy on him. 


1. Here comes another redundant post that he has already posted 500 times...

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 10:40 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:40 am

Not here to address this ****.

And I'll explain why...

It "appears" to you....suggesting that my job is to convince you that you are wrong.

Since it isn't about specifics, what are the odds that you will acknowledge that your vision thing has mislead you?

For example, what do you know about the "willfully withheld" materials in question?

How is thr report defining "willful retention" in this instance?

Shift to 5:20
https://youtu.be/o_pVHb-xJr8?t=309

Also, he has to have known he had the documents in order to put them in cabinets. If he knew he had them, he wilfully retained them - logic

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:45 am

https://youtu.be/o_pVHb-xJr8?t=309
 
Shift to 5:20

I don't wade through youtube videos.

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 10:47 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:47 am

I don't wade through youtube videos.

You don't do much do you?.. I'm not asking you to wade through anything, I'm stating you go to 5:20. That's your own CNN shopping him in
 

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:52 am

You don't do much do you?.. I'm not asking you to wade through anything, I'm stating you go to 5:20

Don't bother.

Either you can answer the questions or you can't.


 

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 10:53 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:53 am

Don't bother.

Either you can answer the questions or you can't.

Either you can read, watch and comprehend answers or you can't. At this point it's pretty obvious which it is... rube..

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 10:55 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:55 am

Either you can read, watch and comprehend answers or you can't. At this point it's pretty obvious which it is... rube..

If I did it your way, I'd be as credulous as you.

Can you answer the questions, or not?
 

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 10:56 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 10:56 am

If I did it your way, I'd be as credulous as you.

Can you answer the questions, or not?

How do you know the questions you've asked haven't been answered, when you refuse to look at my answers?

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 11:12 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 11:12 am

How do you know the questions you've asked haven't been answered, when you refuse to look at my answers?

I've seen your answer.

I don't wade through youtube dreck..

If it is your source for the answers post them and then we can debate them.

Why do Dems keep getting found guilty of a crime and let off. Biden and Clinton. Hard evidence and complete investigation, yet still let go. WTF.

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 11:27 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 11:27 am

I've seen your answer.

I don't wade through youtube dreck..

If it is your source for the answers post them and then we can debate them.
 

> I've seen your answer.
Excellent

>I don't wade through youtube dreck..
No one asked you to. I gave you a precise time in the vid that provided CNN commentators going through precisely the points I've mentioned. That is not YouTube dreck, that is CNN.. Your goddess news channel..

Seriously. You won't read anything, you won't watch anything either - but it's incumbent upon others to provide you with answers that filter through your own constructed narrow strictures that deny the possibility of answers.. kek

>If it is your source for the answers post them and then we can debate them.
Done so .. CNN.. Do you not like CNN? .. You didn't know my source was CNN, because you won't look at the answers to your questions.

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 11:37 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 11:37 am

> I've seen your answer.
Excellent

>I don't wade through youtube dreck..
No one asked you to. I gave you a precise time in the vid that provided CNN commentators going through precisely the points I've mentioned. That is not YouTube dreck, that is CNN.. Your goddess news channel..

Seriously. You won't read anything, you won't watch anything either - but it's incumbent upon others to provide you with answers that filter through your own constructed narrow strictures that deny the possibility of answers.. kek

>If it is your source for the answers post them and then we can debate them.
Done so .. CNN.. Do you not like CNN? .. You didn't know my source was CNN, because you won't look at the answers to your questions.

No one asked you to. I gave you a precise time in the vid that provided CNN commentators going through precisely the points I've mentioned. That is not YouTube dreck, that is CNN.. Your goddess news channel..

Don't oblige me to repeat myself on this topic.

Seriously. You won't read anything

I'll read the answers to my questions.....


 

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 11:41 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 11:41 am

Don't oblige me to repeat myself on this topic.

I'll read the answers to my questions.....

Stop being dishonest. By your own admission, you haven't read anything, you haven't watched anything - you look for every reason to disregard replies, with no regard for the person who's gone to the effort to put them together for you - at your demand. Disgraceful

 

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 11:56 am » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 11:56 am

Stop being dishonest. By your own admission, you haven't read anything, you haven't watched anything - you look for every reason to disregard replies, with no regard for the person who's gone to the effort to put them together for you - at your demand. Disgraceful

You either do or do not know the details.

If you don't, I have no interest in exchanging slogans with you....

If you do, post the answers to my questions. Commit them to "paper".

I don't want to be obliged to extract them from a video.

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 12:05 pm

You either do or do not know the details.

If you don't, I have no interest in exchanging slogans with you....

If you do, post the answers to my questions. Commit them to "paper".

I don't want to be obliged to extract them from a video.

What we've established:

1. If I write the points, you won't read them because 'narrative'
2. If I post CNN stating it on video, you won't watch because you hate all that YouTube **** - and it's not committed to paper - like a narrative

I did the extraction from video for you - you just had to sit there and watch CNN explain nearly all the points I had. You have answers in abundance.

 
 

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 12:17 pm » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 12:17 pm

What we've established:

1. If I write the points, you won't read them because 'narrative'
2. If I post CNN stating it on video, you won't watch because you hate all that YouTube **** - and it's not committed to paper like a narrative

I did the extraction from video for you - you just had to sit there and watch CNN explain nearly all the points I had. You have answers in abundance.

We've established that you are unable to answer the questions asked.

 

R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 12:19 pm » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 12:19 pm

We've established that you are unable to answer the questions asked.

.. and you're not re-asking these elusive questions. Ok - I'll bite. Ask them again

JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

11 Feb 2024, 12:20 pm

.. and you're not re-asking these elusive questions. Ok - I'll bite. Ask them again

No...I asked quite detailed questions, which is why you were caught short.