Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:00 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:00 pm

To what source are you referring?

Don't be vague....you know how you are...

Your screen shot that I than posted a link to.  Your source.

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:03 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:03 pm

Your screen shot that I than posted a link to.  Your source.

Do you have any idea what it is?


Make my case, Runny.



QED.
 

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:04 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:04 pm

Do you have any idea what it is?

Make my case, Runny.

QED.

Make your case.  Keep in mind I provided you a link to it.  I know what it is.  Not sure you do.

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 11:40 am » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 11:40 am

Because it is noted at the very top of the page....even before you get to the table of content....where it is repeated.

That's my guess, anyway.

You're a **** moron, Fondler.

Guess??

It takes a REAL **** IDIOT TO MAKE A GUESS!! 

I came with FACTS and you have only a "guess'??

Tell us how big a **** IDIOT YOU ARE NOW!!

CONFESS, ASSHOLE!! Trump is not a RAPIST AND I LIED ABOUT IT!!

 

*Beekeeper » 19 Jun 2025, 12:06 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:06 pm

Guess??

It takes a REAL **** IDIOT TO MAKE A GUESS!! 


 

I'm quite certain that you're a moron.

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:05 pm

Make your case.  Keep in mind I provided you a link to it.  I know what it is.  Not sure you do.

Keep in mind I provided you a link to it.

To my screenshot?


Stop yapping and tell me what you think it is.

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:11 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:11 pm

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:05 pm

Make your case.  Keep in mind I provided you a link to it.  I know what it is.  Not sure you do.

Keep in mind I provided you a link to it.

To my screenshot?


Stop yapping and tell me what you think it is.

 

LMAO!  Not to your screen shot, moron.  Your screen shot is of the table of contents of the document I linked to.

THE JURY FOUND THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT RAPED BY DEFENDANT

I am not sure you understand the significance of you posting that.  That for your admission.

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:18 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:18 pm

LMAO!  Not to your screen shot, moron.  Your screen shot is of the table of contents of the document I linked to.

THE JURY FOUND THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT RAPED BY DEFENDANT

I am not sure you understand the significance of you posting that.  That for your admission.

I do...

Which is why I invite you to tell me what that document is.

Because you clearly don't. 

Now proceed so that you may bask in yet more of your stupid.
 

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:27 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:27 pm

I do...

Which is why I invite you to tell me what that document is.

Because you clearly don't. 

Now proceed so that you may bask in yet more of your stupid.

You are still unable to make a case.  The first page tells you exactly what it is.  Are you retarded or what?  Man up pusy, make your case.

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:32 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:32 pm

You are still unable to make a case.  

You keep doing it for me.

It's the reason you always run from questions. 

You've admitted it.

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:38 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:38 pm

You keep doing it for me.

It's the reason you always run from questions. 

You've admitted it.

The first page tells you exactly what it is.  

Stop beg afraid.
 

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:40 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:40 pm

The first page tells you exactly what it is.  

Stop beg afraid.

You're the one not answering.....again.

Just take a screenshot, post it and I will explain what you are looking at.

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:42 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:42 pm

You're the one not answering.....again.

Just take a screenshot, post it and I will explain what you are looking at.

This is your casenot mine.  In a motion that was filed you posted a screen shot of the table of contents.  On that particular page the the FACT that the jury found that the plaintiff (Caroll) was NOT raped by the defendant.

Thank you for posting what you did.  You have admitted the jury did not find him liable for rape.

And no, I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

 

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm

This is your casenot mine.  In a motion that was filed you posted a screen shot of the table of contents.  On that particular page the the FACT that the jury found that the plaintiff (Caroll) was NOT raped by the defendant.

Thank you for posting what you did.  You have admitted the jury did not find him liable for rape.

And no, I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

  In a motion that was filed

By whom?


First time.

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm

This is your casenot mine.  In a motion that was filed you posted a screen shot of the table of contents.  On that particular page the the FACT that the jury found that the plaintiff (Caroll) was NOT raped by the defendant.

Thank you for posting what you did.  You have admitted the jury did not find him liable for rape.

And no, I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

Let's consider the stupid of this assertion.

The following is the sequence of events..

Beefondler says something stupid.

He is corrected. To make certain that he is

A) edified

B) humbled

Fondler is asked to post the grounds on which Team Grifty petitioned for a reduction of the judgment.

Of course Fondler has no idea, and demands to be shown evidence that Kaplan was responding to a petition filed by Team Grifty.

Direct reference to it is made in Kaplan's response, and that passage is provided.

Fondler is not able to understand the significance of this, and now demands to be shown the petition itself.

Again he is accommodated.

To this point he has STILL not answered the question, after having 3 of his demands satisfied.

When he finally addresses it, he lies....obliging me to reproduce the table of contents.

Along stalks @*HooooeyVagina.....he sees the table of contents and is certain he has found his grail - because one item is described - "THE JURY FOUND THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT RAPED BY DEFENDANT"

When asked to tell of what it is the table of contents, Tiny demands that I have to do identify the source I located when looking for it.

These people are unbelievably stupid.







 

THIS IS HOW I MEAN THAT.


MORANS,

THIS IS WHY YOU MUST ALWAYS ANSWER MASTER VEGETABLE'S QUESTIONS THE FIRST TIME!

ALL HAIL MASTER VEGETABLE!
 

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:46 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:46 pm

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm

This is your casenot mine.  In a motion that was filed you posted a screen shot of the table of contents.  On that particular page the the FACT that the jury found that the plaintiff (Caroll) was NOT raped by the defendant.

Thank you for posting what you did.  You have admitted the jury did not find him liable for rape.

And no, I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

  In a motion that was filed

By whom?


First time.

 

 

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 1:07 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 1:07 pm

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm

This is your casenot mine.  In a motion that was filed you posted a screen shot of the table of contents.  On that particular page the the FACT that the jury found that the plaintiff (Caroll) was NOT raped by the defendant.

Thank you for posting what you did.  You have admitted the jury did not find him liable for rape.

And no, I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

Let's consider the stupid of this assertion.

The following is the sequence of events..

Beefondler says something stupid.

He is corrected. To make certain that he is

A) edified

B) humbled

Fondler is asked to post the grounds on which Team Grifty petitioned for a reduction of the judgment.

Of course Fondler has no idea, and demands to be shown evidence that Kaplan was responding to a petition filed by Team Grifty.

Direct reference to it is made in Kaplan's response, and that passage is provided.

Fondler is not able to understand the significance of this, and now demands to be shown the petition itself.

Again he is accommodated.

To this point he has STILL not answered the question, after having 3 of his demands satisfied.

When he finally addresses it, he lies....obliging me to reproduce the table of contents.

Along stalks @*HooooeyVagina.....he sees the table of contents and is certain he has found his grail - because one item is described - "THE JURY FOUND THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT RAPED BY DEFENDANT"

When asked to tell of what it is the table of contents, Tiny demands that I have to do identify the source I located when looking for it.

These people are unbelievably stupid.







 

 

I also went to page 3.  You have provided more documentation that the jury DID NOT find him liable for rape.

This is the diversion you create to avoid making a case.  It is your thread so let's see how long it takes you.

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 12:46 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:46 pm

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 12:45 pm

This is your casenot mine.  In a motion that was filed you posted a screen shot of the table of contents.  On that particular page the the FACT that the jury found that the plaintiff (Caroll) was NOT raped by the defendant.

Thank you for posting what you did.  You have admitted the jury did not find him liable for rape.

And no, I will not be playing your 20 questions games until you answer questions yourself and learn to make a case.

  In a motion that was filed

By whom?


First time.

 

The name of the law firm that wote it and on whose behalf is also on the first page.

Acknoweldege you were answered.

Blackvegetable » 19 Jun 2025, 1:07 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 1:07 pm

Let's consider the stupid of this assertion.

The following is the sequence of events..

Beefondler says something stupid.

He is corrected. To make certain that he is

A) edified

B) humbled

Fondler is asked to post the grounds on which Team Grifty petitioned for a reduction of the judgment.

Of course Fondler has no idea, and demands to be shown evidence that Kaplan was responding to a petition filed by Team Grifty.

Direct reference to it is made in Kaplan's response, and that passage is provided.

Fondler is not able to understand the significance of this, and now demands to be shown the petition itself.

Again he is accommodated.

To this point he has STILL not answered the question, after having 3 of his demands satisfied.

When he finally addresses it, he lies....obliging me to reproduce the table of contents.

Along stalks @*HooooeyVagina.....he sees the table of contents and is certain he has found his grail - because one item is described - "THE JURY FOUND THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT RAPED BY DEFENDANT"

When asked to tell of what it is the table of contents, Tiny demands that I have to do identify the source I located when looking for it.

These people are unbelievably stupid.

"Actual-vegetable"...Yer over wordiness shows you are insecure.  Perhaps yer guts were stumped out in the last election and you haven't recovered yet?      



 
 

*Huey » 19 Jun 2025, 1:29 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Jun 2025, 1:29 pm

The name of the law firm that wote it and on whose behalf is also on the first page.

Acknoweldege you were answered.

I wasn't answered...

Do you understand the significance of that in the context of the "fact" asserted?