Liberal Forum

Cannonpointer » 07 Jan 2025, 12:15 am » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 12:15 am

The jury checked the "no" box as regards rape.

Beevee doesn't credit evidence. He clings to narrative.

I know. That's why I asked. Veghead loves narratives against Trump no matter how fabricated they are. 

Cannonpointer » 07 Jan 2025, 9:39 am » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 9:39 am

Given that the jury said no to rape, you are evidence-proof and a moran.

Do you consider yourself smarter than Connie?

Cannonpointer » 07 Jan 2025, 9:39 am » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 9:39 am

Not according to the jury. 

And saying it isn't proving it.

It is why the jury awarded 2 million.

**** idiot 
 

Blackvegetable » 07 Jan 2025, 12:47 pm » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 12:47 pm

It is why the jury awarded 2 million.

**** idiot

was Trump convicted of rape?

Blackvegetable » 07 Jan 2025, 12:46 pm » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 12:46 pm

Do you consider yourself smarter than Connie?

No questions, dick sucker. 

I consider myself smart enough to know that no means no, ya fruit.     

Blackvegetable » 07 Jan 2025, 12:47 pm » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 12:47 pm

It is why the jury awarded 2 million.

**** idiot

No means no, fruity. 

Cannonpointer » 07 Jan 2025, 2:54 pm » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 2:54 pm

No means no, fruity.

“Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”


means


“Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Blackvegetable » 07 Jan 2025, 3:07 pm » wrote: ↑

07 Jan 2025, 3:07 pm

“Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

means

“Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

And no means no.

No is what the jury said. 

Thanks for gaying.

Well folks BV the liberal shill still hasn't answered the question

FJB » 13 Jan 2025, 9:33 am » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 9:33 am

Well folks BV the liberal shill still hasn't answered the question

Blackvegetable » 13 Jan 2025, 3:04 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:04 pm

You gave TWO answers to that question.  Is this your final answer and do you have a link?  Why are you afraid to post the link?  

*Huey » 13 Jan 2025, 3:19 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:19 pm

You gave TWO answers to that question.  Is this your final answer and do you have a link?  Why are you afraid to post the link?

No I didn't. 

Blackvegetable » 13 Jan 2025, 3:33 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:33 pm

No I didn't.

There is the unambiguous yes answer and then that screen shot answer.  Is the second one the right one?

*Huey » 13 Jan 2025, 3:37 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:37 pm

There is the unambiguous yes answer and then that screen shot answer.  Is the second one the right one?

There's a dedicated thread where any remaining question can be resolved,


It is unambiguously clear from the actual EVIDENCE presented that I have answered the question EXACTLY as required.

Blackvegetable » 13 Jan 2025, 3:49 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:49 pm

There's a dedicated thread where any remaining question can be resolved,

It is unambiguously clear from the actual EVIDENCE presented that I have answered the question EXACTLY as required.

****. You don't answer questions. If you did, then how many times were you asked before you finally got around to it? 

Coward. 

Blackvegetable » 13 Jan 2025, 3:49 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:49 pm

There's a dedicated thread where any remaining question can be resolved,

It is unambiguously clear from the actual EVIDENCE presented that I have answered the question EXACTLY as required.

No, there is a tribute thread with PG enabled.  The facts are here.  It is already proven that only question asked of you prior to your unambiguously yes answer was the one in the OP.  You were slammed big time.

Now two things.  Regardless of your mess about your first answer is the 2nd answer the one you are going with?

And two, please provide the link so we can see the date and how long it took you to correct yourself. Man up, Huckleberry.

Blackvegetable » 13 Jan 2025, 3:04 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:04 pm

Your answer is false...the jury did NOT convict him of rape.... keep spreading lies asshole

Blackvegetable » 13 Jan 2025, 3:49 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 3:49 pm

There's a dedicated thread where any remaining question can be resolved,

It is unambiguously clear from the actual EVIDENCE presented that I have answered the question EXACTLY as required.

NO YOU DID NOT **** ANSWER THE QUESTION

FJB » 13 Jan 2025, 5:30 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 5:30 pm

NO YOU DID NOT **** ANSWER THE QUESTION

Nobody knows the answer.. It is not in the Judeo Christian Islamic Triangle of Doom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wlZaumFulA

Johnny You » 13 Jan 2025, 7:56 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2025, 7:56 pm

Nobody knows the answer.. It is not in the Judeo Christian Islamic Triangle of Doom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wlZaumFulA

the answer is self evident people following theories and theologies won't accept the actual answer because it doesn't fit in their social narrative of life exceeds time adapting in series parallel positions of ancestry now.

the whole concept in evolution theory is missing links but none were ever missing. Just relative time theory added 3 minutes and 56 seconds that don't exist to factual 24/7 timeline statistics used since dawn of civilization. this is why it took 4,000 years to get a calendar that would coverup natural time evolving only adapting to the moment here from point conceived to decomposed corpse.

Series parallel is individually spontaneously present simultaneously here as whole population living now lived eternally separated since their fertilized cell was conceived.

Secrets the chain of command never tells management of people defending humanity in every divided franchise of ideologies governing social outcomes of every great great grandchild replacing their previous 4 generation gaps so far, here today.