Blackvegetable » 24 Jun 2024, 6:12 am » wrote: ↑ You're one dumb motherfucler.
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/20 ... t-evil-men
Do you see it credited?Beekeeper » 24 Jun 2024, 6:25 am » wrote: ↑ Vanity Fair as your "source"??? From a FORMER EDITOR of Vanity Fair who OPENLY HATES TRUMP that made a film?? With NO OTHER EVIDENCE in existence that says, "This is Cohn and Trump"???
But what you DO have is a photo of SOME UNKNOWN AND UNIDENIFIED person with Cohn!! Possibly at Studio 54 in NY city. But even THAT is not proven.
Damn, son, you are OPENLY PROVING how easily manipulated you are!! No really, you CONSTANTLY PROVE IT!!
So?? ANYONE can credit a PHOTO, but that doesn't mean that the PHOTOGRAPHER identified ANYONE, ****!! ONLY that they took the image.
Post the name of the photographer.Beekeeper » 24 Jun 2024, 6:32 am » wrote: ↑ So?? ANYONE can credit a PHOTO, but that doesn't mean that the PHOTOGRAPHER identified ANYONE, ****!! ONLY that they took the image.
How **** STUPID are you goig to get with this claim without ANYONE VALIDATING YOUR IMAGE???
No reason to. She is only a PHOTOGRAPHER and has NEVER identified the people IN THE IMAGE!!
Just do it and we'll see.Beekeeper » 24 Jun 2024, 6:41 am » wrote: ↑ No reason to. She is only a PHOTOGRAPHER and has NEVER identified the people IN THE IMAGE!!
When you can get THAT, you might have something. UNTIL THEN, you only have the PERSON WHO TOOK THE IMAGE credited!!
Fact is, she has THOUSANDS of images she took without ANYONE being identified in them!! Suck on that one DICK BREATH!! The FACT IS, if she would have identified the people in that image, she would have needed a RELEASE from SIGNED BY THEM to use this image since it was taken in a PUBLIC PLACE!!
Funny how you have NO CLUE about the USAGE LAWS of photographic images, huh, DICKBREATH??
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
You lied.Beekeeper » 24 Jun 2024, 6:58 am » wrote: ↑ YOU made the claim, YOU post the name, Dr. DICK SUCKER!!
Then you can show us the NIL RELEASE she doesn't have!!
Suck on that one BOY!!
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Blackvegetable » 24 Jun 2024, 7:02 am » wrote: ↑ You lied.
I haven't made any claim yet.
Post it.
Unless you're satisfied that you're about to get your *** kicked, again.
Blackvegetable » 24 Jun 2024, 7:02 am » wrote: ↑ You lied.
I haven't made any claim yet.
Post it.
Unless you're satisfied that you're about to get your *** kicked, again.
#14 Re: No grooming, huh?? Explain THIS one you QUEER BITCHES!!The pansy in the Face **** Me face?
That's Mary Trump's boy, Sweet Donnie...
That's not a claim, ****.Beekeeper » 24 Jun 2024, 7:04 am » wrote: ↑ Are you on CRACK???
YOU CLAIMED that this was an image of Trump, aka "Mary Trump's boy"!!
About that *** KICKING you just gave YOURSELF............
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Statement of fact.Beekeeper » 24 Jun 2024, 7:07 am » wrote: ↑ Oops...
#14 Re: No grooming, huh?? Explain THIS one you QUEER BITCHES!!
So you made "no claims", huh???
Blackvegetable » 24 Jun 2024, 7:07 am » wrote: ↑ That's not a claim, ****.
That's a statement of fact, supported by evidence.
Now stop running and take the asskicking you've been crying for...
For anyone wondering what the **** this has to do with anything (or, "everyone on the board"), someone told this **** moron that the adult on the right is a young Donald Trump.
The tell in this thread is how you were so quick to defend one of your LGBTQXYZ heroes that got caught diddling children by trying to change the subject from the original topic.
It wasn't something I was told.Cannonpointer » 24 Jun 2024, 7:20 am » wrote: ↑ For anyone wondering what the **** this has to do with anything (or, "everyone on the board"), someone told this **** moron that the adult on the right is a young Donald Trump.
No, I am not joking. The moron was told that is Donald Trump, so in his mind, that is Donald Trump.
And yes, that DOES explain how he could look at a wiener and think it's a long vadge.
And in the entirety of the internet, a Vanity Fair Society page caption if your sole piece of "evidence".
No fee-fees.*rippy38 » 24 Jun 2024, 7:21 am » wrote: ↑ The tell in this thread is how you were so quick to defend one of your LGBTQXYZ heroes that got caught diddling children by trying to change the subject from the original topic.
Your very first post here was a diversion from the OP.
No wonder you have the label... "Child Groomer, Sexual Predator" ya sick ****.
You defend these pieces of filth.
There's a gang of us headed there now, mother ****! Hope we catch you!Blackvegetable » 23 Jun 2024, 8:00 pm » wrote: ↑ I'll make it easy for you...
You know the way to your mama's house?