Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 7:20 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:20 am

Just post the rule.

And remember, you're the moron who was totally puzzled by the qualification of a "hoax" as a "hoax".

no.  It is best when dealing with a disingenuous ****** like you to get you to be specific when in a discussion with you.  That is something you hate to do because you can be held “accountable” for your words if wrong.  

It was a hoax started by a Trump rival for the nomination and continued by the Clinton campaign.  You were **** snookered.  

 

*Huey » 04 Jun 2025, 7:26 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:26 am

no.  It is best when dealing with a disingenuous ****** like you to get you to be specific when in a discussion with you.  That is something you hate to do because you can be held “accountable” for your words if wrong.  

It was a hoax started by a Trump rival for the nomination and continued by the Clinton campaign.  You were **** snookered.

no.  It is best when dealing with a disingenuous ****** like you to get you to be specific when in a discussion with you.  

pathological projection....like everything else...

That is something you hate to do because you can be held “accountable” for your words if wrong.  

words that haunt.......and taunt?

if wrong

"if"

with you, it’s "when".

It was a hoax started by a Trump rival for the nomination and continued by the Clinton campaign.  You were **** snookered.

A nearly 1,000-page report confirmed the special counsel’s findings at a moment when President Trump’s allies have sought to undermine that inquiry.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/p ... roid-share

Do you want to post Mueller's words on the matter?

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 7:00 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:00 am

 

Post the numbers.

How many times do you have to be TOLD, DICKSUCKER??

https://i.postimg.cc/jdmqq138/BVs-Demands-Own-Work.jpg



POST THEM YOURSELF IF YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE SOME **** POINT!!

**** OFF!!

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 7:36 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:36 am

pathological projection....like everything else...

words that haunt.......and taunt?

"if"

with you, it’s "when".

A nearly 1,000-page report confirmed the special counsel’s findings at a moment when President Trump’s allies have sought to undermine that inquiry.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/p ... roid-share

Do you want to post Mueller's words on the matter?

DICKSUCK, are you STILL so obstinate that you CAN ONLY USE A SOURCE TO VALIDATE YOUR TDS??

FACTS....

The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

Mueller finds no collusion with Russia, leaves obstruction question open

*Beekeeper » 04 Jun 2025, 7:55 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:55 am

How many times do you have to be TOLD, DICKSUCKER??

https://i.postimg.cc/jdmqq138/BVs-Demands-Own-Work.jpg

POST THEM YOURSELF IF YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE SOME **** POINT!!

**** OFF!!

*Beekeeper » 04 Jun 2025, 7:58 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:58 am

DICKSUCK, are you STILL so obstinate that you CAN ONLY USE A SOURCE TO VALIDATE YOUR TDS??

FACTS....

The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

Mueller finds no collusion with Russia, leaves obstruction question open

“The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed,” Mueller told the House judiciary committee, adding that Trump could theoretically be indicted after he leaves office. 


“We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term,” Mueller added. “Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.”

https://www.politico.eu/article/mueller ... tion-line/
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 7:36 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:36 am

pathological projection....like everything else...

words that haunt.......and taunt?

"if"

with you, it’s "when".

A nearly 1,000-page report confirmed the special counsel’s findings at a moment when President Trump’s allies have sought to undermine that inquiry.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/p ... roid-share

Do you want to post Mueller's words on the matter?

do your own work.

*Huey » 04 Jun 2025, 8:13 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 8:13 am

do your own work.

:rofl:  

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 8:33 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 8:33 am

the hypocrite strikes again.  

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 8:02 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 8:02 am

“The president was not exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed,” Mueller told the House judiciary committee, adding that Trump could theoretically be indicted after he leaves office. 

“We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term,” Mueller added. “Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.”

https://www.politico.eu/article/mueller ... tion-line/

ASSHOLE, I QUOTED FROM MUELLERS REPORT!!

Now, GO **** YOURSELF because THAT is what you DEMANDED!!

NO COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA, AND NO EVIDENCE OF ANY OBSTRUCTION OR OTHERWISE ANYTHING BY TRUMP'S CAMPAIGN!!

PERIOD!!!!

Sucks for you, ASSHOLE DICKSUCKING PIECE OF ****!!

Now, TAKE YOUR TDS and SHOVE IT UP YOUR NASTY **** ***!!

Nod.

@ROG62  @Vegas  @RebelGator  @Cannonpointer  
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 7:59 am » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:59 am

Oh wait!! COULD IT BE because of a PLANDEMIC that YOUR SIDE insisted on SHUTTING DOWN THE COUNTRY so you could win an election??

GO GET YOURSELF ****, DICKSUCK!!

Nod

*Beekeeper » 04 Jun 2025, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 12:49 pm

ASSHOLE, I QUOTED FROM MUELLERS REPORT!!

Now, GO **** YOURSELF because THAT is what you DEMANDED!!

NO COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA, AND NO EVIDENCE OF ANY OBSTRUCTION OR OTHERWISE ANYTHING BY TRUMP'S CAMPAIGN!!

PERIOD!!!!

Sucks for you, ASSHOLE DICKSUCKING PIECE OF ****!!

Now, TAKE YOUR TDS and SHOVE IT UP YOUR NASTY **** ***!!

Nod.

@ROG62  @Vegas  @RebelGator  @Cannonpointer

Just stop.

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 1:00 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 1:00 pm

Just stop.

You now want me to STOP KICKING YOUR *** INTO A MASSIVE PIECE OF GOO??

Nope!!

Nod

*Beekeeper » 04 Jun 2025, 1:06 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 1:06 pm

You now want me to STOP KICKING YOUR *** INTO A MASSIVE PIECE OF GOO??

Nope!!

Nod

Go ahead and adjust for Covid.




I know, right?
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 1:00 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 1:00 pm

Just stop.

The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

*Beekeeper » 04 Jun 2025, 1:18 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 1:18 pm

The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

You ran from the question, Cocksuck.

*Beekeeper » 04 Jun 2025, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 12:49 pm

ASSHOLE, I QUOTED FROM MUELLERS REPORT!!

Now, GO **** YOURSELF because THAT is what you DEMANDED!!

NO COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA, AND NO EVIDENCE OF ANY OBSTRUCTION OR OTHERWISE ANYTHING BY TRUMP'S CAMPAIGN!!

PERIOD!!!!

Sucks for you, ASSHOLE DICKSUCKING PIECE OF ****!!

Now, TAKE YOUR TDS and SHOVE IT UP YOUR NASTY **** ***!!

Nod.

@ROG62  @Vegas  @RebelGator  @Cannonpointer

Be extremely clear - and this is something that you can bet the farm on. Beevee is impervious to evidence. 

Not once in all the years he has posted here has he EVER admitted error, respected evidence, or backed up one inch. 

I admitted error yesterday. viewtopic.php?p=2752789#p2752789

I have admitted error on this board more times than I can count. People with chops do that - weak shills don't.

Cannonpointer » 04 Jun 2025, 6:09 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 6:09 pm

Be extremely clear - and this is something that you can bet the farm on. Beevee is impervious to evidence. 

Not once in all the years he has posted here has he EVER admitted error, respected evidence, or backed up one inch. 

I admitted error yesterday. viewtopic.php?p=2752789#p2752789

I have admitted error on this board more times than I can count. People with chops do that - weak shills don't.

I have admitted error on this board more times than I can count. People with chops do that - weak shills don't

And now you can show us again.

viewtopic.php?p=2734260#p2734260

Blackvegetable » 04 Jun 2025, 7:46 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 7:46 pm

And now you can show us again.

viewtopic.php?p=2734260#p2734260

Let us peruse your offering:

Ok....I'll lead...

I was wrong a couple of years ago.

@*HooooeyVagina asked me where I believed surveys of Presidential scholars would rank the Biden presidency.

I suggested he would be ranked in the low to mid 20s.

@*HooooeyVagina was right to scoff at my prediction.

I was wrong.

Let's see Huey's response to it:

*Huey » 22 Apr 2025, 8:48 am » wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2025, 8:48 am

The difference between you and I is I admit when I am wrong.  In the very instance you do admit you are wrong it is not because you are rarely wrong.  It took you MONTHS, literally months, to adit PK was a mistake.  You ran and ran from that one.  You still have not admitted Biden was wrong, was lying, make the 5x comment.  And you still have not admitted it was not a gun in pieces.

That is just to name a few.  You blame others, you lie, and basically are a dishonest POS.  If your daughter thinks you are wonderful she too is a POS.

Just stating the facts.

And now mine:

Cannonpointer » 23 Apr 2025, 10:40 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Apr 2025, 10:40 pm

You missed a prediction? How courageous of you to admit that two years later, you panty dancing fraud. I proved you wrong with a you tube link consisting of CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY, giving you the start and end time of the 46 seconds that proved you wrong, and you insisted that you didn't trust youtube clips and demanded a transcript.

You run from questions like a bitch - you're the biggest **** on the board, you cowardly fapper.

You have never admitted that you were wrong. "My guess didn't pan out as I thought it would" is not an admission of factual error, whatsoever. You are too big a **** to admit that you drank the tranny koolaid - even after your little friend broke like a twig under questioning. You have run like a bitch from defending almost every position you have ever taken - hiding behind rhetorical questions and evasive claptrap. If you have a pork chop, good on ya -cuz it's the only chop you've got. 

I stand by my critique, you wee man with wee feet. 
 
 

Cannonpointer » 04 Jun 2025, 8:13 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2025, 8:13 pm

Let us peruse your offering:

Let's see Huey's response to it:

And now mine:

You have never admitted that you were wrong. "My guess didn't pan out as I thought it would" is not an admission of factual error, whatsoever. You are too big a **** to admit that you drank the tranny koolaid - even after your little friend broke like a twig under questioning. You have run like a bitch from defending almost every position you have ever taken - hiding behind rhetorical questions and evasive claptrap. If you have a pork chop, good on ya -cuz it's the only chop you've got. 

I stand by my critique, you wee man with wee feet.

So much for your high pygmy pony.

And citing @*HooooeyVagina?