Go back
DOJ now releasing unredacted names of victims

DOJ now releasing unredacted names of victims

Debates


@Suzianne said
WHY do you support people with a differing political ideology than you?

Just to be a jackass?
By that I hope you don't mean to indicate that you reject the free exchange of ideas.

Or are you Anti-American? 😉


@Suzianne said
And you are so incredibly hypocritical, wishy-washy and dishonorable.
Perhaps "nuanced" ?


@Suzianne said
And you are so incredibly hypocritical, wishy-washy and dishonorable.

I don't expect you to work on that.

But the difference between us is you want to somehow control me to "work on" something I'm not doing.

You are so hypocritical that if I were indeed like you, you'd want to be my best friend.

As if.
Perhaps I should clarify:

No matter how many tickets rookie might have sold, there is not going to be a Jello-pool wrestling match tonight.


@Suzianne said
If you think there is room for "reasonable conversation" between any LGBTQ+ and a Cliff- or AvJoe-like conservative, then you are dangerous to your own people.
I am my own person.


@Suzianne said
I wouldn't pronounce it quite that way.
Careful -- my alert quota must have recharged by now.

2 edits

@sonhouse said
Escalating? When DOJ is LITERALLY THUMBING THEIR NOSE at the law? When near unanimous vote in both houses and Trump signed the bill and they had a FULL MONTH to get their act together and now it is clear as hell the act is to protect Trump AND his rich filthy buddies.
Dear Sonic Slinger Laoshi! -- what you quoted had to do with the burgeoning relationship between Suzi and me, and not governmental affairs.

Or maybe you read it in some kind of synchronistic or Hermetic way?


@sonhouse said
Escalating? When DOJ is LITERALLY THUMBING THEIR NOSE at the law? When near unanimous vote in both houses and Trump signed the bill and they had a FULL MONTH to get their act together and now it is clear as hell the act is to protect Trump AND his rich filthy buddies.
Thank goodness for that 2nd Amendment, though.


@sonhouse said
You better check the records, I never said that or heard about it till I read it from wildgrass. I said if true DOJ would cover it up INSTANTLY. Burn notice.
I was talking to wildgrass not you stupid.


@wildgrass said
I don't watch those shows or visit those websites, so I have no idea.
The WHERE TF did you get the claim from?
Waiting for an answer.


@Cliff-Mashburn said
The WHERE TF did you get the claim from?
Waiting for an answer.
The information is in the Epstein files.

1 edit

@wildgrass said
The information is in the Epstein files.
Then why isn't it being reported?
Answer: Because it's not in the Epstein files as you claim.
Find it and post it or STFU.


@Cliff-Mashburn said
Then why isn't it being reported?
Answer: Because it's not in the Epstein files as you claim.
Find it and post it or STFU.
Why should you care? You're probably Canadian or Chinese or something.

(Sorry, China.)

1 edit

@Suzianne said
I wouldn't pronounce it quite that way.
You must hate women, to even hint at such a vulgarity.

Vote Up
Vote Down

@Arkturos said
You must hate women, to even hint at such a vulgarity.
Not nearly as much as you.


@Cliff-Mashburn said
Then why isn't it being reported?
Answer: Because it's not in the Epstein files as you claim.
Find it and post it or STFU.
With, or without, the DoJ redactions?