I've restated my questions and points at your request, multiple times. Why are you reticent to extend me the same courtesy?R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑ No...I asked quite detailed questions, which is why you were caught short.
It's not about your questions.JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 12:29 pm » wrote: ↑ I've restated my questions and points at your request, multiple times. Why are you reticent to extend me the same courtesy?
. you've refused to look at them - what did you think was going to happen?R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 12:33 pm » wrote: ↑ It's not about your questions.
It's about your answers.
I don't see them.
That you would post the answers to the question.JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 12:39 pm » wrote: ↑ . you've refused to look at them - what did you think was going to happen?
Once again. You cannot claim the answers were not posted when you've refused to look at the answers.R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑ That you would post the answers to the question.
I knew it was a long shot.
YOU are CORRECT...Beekeeper » 08 Feb 2024, 7:12 pm » wrote: ↑ Since bye-DUMB got off scot free for IDENTICALLY what Trump was charged criminally with, it's OBVIOUS that there is a 2 tiered justice system in this nation- one for Dems and toss the book at Republicans.
THAT ALONE is more than grounds to have Trumps case completely and totally dismissed on PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT since bye-DUMB walks scot free. You can't give ONE A PASS and not the other!!
I imagine a lot of LWNJs are going to be TOTALLY PISSED in about a month or so when TRUMP's CHARGES ARE TOTALLY DISMISSED ON GROUNDS THAT THE PROSECUTION IS USING "selective" prosecution without merit!!
Can you LOSERS whine for us in advance???
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
You didn't post them.JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 12:50 pm » wrote: ↑ Once again. You cannot claim the answers were not posted when you've refused to look at the answers.
Jesus Christ.. What question did you have, that wasn't answered by the video?
JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 1:24 pm » wrote: ↑ Jesus Christ.. What question did you have, that wasn't answered by the video?
So don't **** sit here, and accuse me of not providing answers, when I've provided them - but you'r special-princess *** is too special to look at the answers, because they're not in a format that's quite the right shade of pink for you. You've been provided with the answers. Your complaint isn't that you haven't had the answers, your complaint is you refuse to look.. The solution to that is incumbent upon youR.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 1:39 pm » wrote: ↑ with what part of
"I'm not looking for your answers in a youtube video"
are you struggling?
If I have to find them, you didn't provide them.JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑ So don't **** sit here, and accuse me of not providing answers, when I've provided them - but you'r special-princess *** is too special to look at the answers, because they're not in a format that's quite the right shade of pink for you. You've been provided with the answers. Your complaint isn't that you haven't had the answers, your complaint is you refuse to look.. The solution to that is incumbent upon you
Doesn't follow at all.
Yes, it does.
No, you're debating me. You wanted backing, because you didn't like my 'narrative' - I provided it in a CNN news report. Then you wanted bullet-points, which I also provided. I don't know what your complaint is at this point or what you want, but your requests have been met in a reasonable fashion. If you want more, you have to be even more pettily specific. Be my guest
I aaked specific questions.JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 2:14 pm » wrote: ↑ No, you're debating me. You wanted backing, because you didn't like my 'narrative' - I provided it in a CNN news report. Then you wanted bullet-points, which I also provided. I don't know what your complaint is at this point or what you want, but your requests have been met in a reasonable fashion. If you want more, you have to be even more pettily specific. Be my guest
You haven't asked any questions that weren't dealt with by the video.. you don't know that because you refused to watch it.R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 2:33 pm » wrote: ↑ I aaked specific questions.
In discussing this with you I don't want to be obliged to find what your proxy is saying.
I want to address what YOU'RE saying.
It's not "dealt with"...JustinSane » 11 Feb 2024, 2:35 pm » wrote: ↑ You haven't asked any questions that weren't dealt with by the video.. you don't know that because you refused to watch it.
I am saying the things I've said. There is my backup.. so it not just.. you know.. tedious narrative.
nod...
run...R.Suave » 11 Feb 2024, 9:27 am » wrote: ↑ I don't owe your fancies ****...
If you can present an argument, with specifics, get back to me.
^^^ ****...