RereadAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:56 amIf what? Now you won't even admit your own words.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:38 pmNo, I said if.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:37 pmYes you did, you admitted there was a high probability trump did something but won't say what, and you admitted his campaign acted 'highly unethically' but won't say what they did.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:36 pmOk keep going. Also didn't admit anything. Oh twisty twisty.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:34 pmTrump was actually involved in the Trump campaign. Yet we've already established the campaign colluded, he tried to cover it up, and we're about to establish he knew in advance too if you can grow a pair.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:28 pm
I haven't wobbled. I asked you to prove Trump, you're trying to prove campaign. So just keep going
You're nearly there, you just admitted 'it's a high probability he did' and his campaign did something 'highly unethical', high probability that he did what exactly? What did his campaign do that was unethical? And how do you determine the probability that he did the thing you can't specify is high if you also claim there is no evidence? You don't think assigning a probability to something happening is an evidence based assessment?
The Necro-Hammy Romance - aka Necro's epic dodge
Moderator: Biker
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:10 pmRereadAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:56 amIf what? Now you won't even admit your own words.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:38 pmNo, I said if.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:37 pmYes you did, you admitted there was a high probability trump did something but won't say what, and you admitted his campaign acted 'highly unethically' but won't say what they did.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:36 pmOk keep going. Also didn't admit anything. Oh twisty twisty.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:34 pm
Trump was actually involved in the Trump campaign. Yet we've already established the campaign colluded, he tried to cover it up, and we're about to establish he knew in advance too if you can grow a pair.
You're nearly there, you just admitted 'it's a high probability he did' and his campaign did something 'highly unethical', high probability that he did what exactly? What did his campaign do that was unethical? And how do you determine the probability that he did the thing you can't specify is high if you also claim there is no evidence? You don't think assigning a probability to something happening is an evidence based assessment?
So, the thing the campaign did was collude with the Russians, and it was 'highly unethical' that trump covered it up? And the high probability would be that he colluded too?you, no if wrote: Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
Come on, you're nearly there. What was the thing that the campaign did?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Oh sorry, forgot the if. Should have read if he covered up....so go on.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:17 pmnecronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:10 pmRereadAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:56 amIf what? Now you won't even admit your own words.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:38 pmNo, I said if.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:37 pmYes you did, you admitted there was a high probability trump did something but won't say what, and you admitted his campaign acted 'highly unethically' but won't say what they did.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:36 pm
Ok keep going. Also didn't admit anything. Oh twisty twisty.So, the highly unethical thing was colluding with the russians, and you admit trump covered it up? And the high probability would be that he colluded too?you, no if wrote: Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
Come on, you're nearly there.
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
He has admitted drafting the false statement his son produced that he denied doing. As I have already told you.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:28 pmOh sorry, forgot the if. Should have read if he covered up....so go on.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:17 pmnecronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:10 pmRereadAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:56 amIf what? Now you won't even admit your own words.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:38 pmNo, I said if.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:37 pm
Yes you did, you admitted there was a high probability trump did something but won't say what, and you admitted his campaign acted 'highly unethically' but won't say what they did.So, the highly unethical thing was colluding with the russians, and you admit trump covered it up? And the high probability would be that he colluded too?you, no if wrote: Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
Come on, you're nearly there.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/02/poli ... index.html
So no need for the 'if' you threw in after realising you had admitted something. He has admitted it. Can you admit he has admitted it or are you back to running?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Ok he covered up, but go on. Hey you've already added some, so we've both moved forward. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:32 pmHe has admitted drafting the false statement his son produced that he denied doing. As I have already told you.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:28 pmOh sorry, forgot the if. Should have read if he covered up....so go on.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:17 pmnecronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:10 pmRereadSo, the highly unethical thing was colluding with the russians, and you admit trump covered it up? And the high probability would be that he colluded too?you, no if wrote: Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
Come on, you're nearly there.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/02/poli ... index.html
So no need for the 'if' you threw in after realising you had admitted something. He has admitted it. Can you admit he has admitted it or are you back to running?
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
I've told you that repeatedly. You could at any time have challenged the statement trump covered it up as untrue, in which case I'd have googled the widely known and publicly available information for you. See how much faster this can go if you participate?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:41 pmOk he covered up, but go on. Hey you've already added some, so we've both moved forward. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:32 pmHe has admitted drafting the false statement his son produced that he denied doing. As I have already told you.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:28 pmOh sorry, forgot the if. Should have read if he covered up....so go on.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:17 pmSo, the highly unethical thing was colluding with the russians, and you admit trump covered it up? And the high probability would be that he colluded too?you, no if wrote: Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
Come on, you're nearly there.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/02/poli ... index.html
So no need for the 'if' you threw in after realising you had admitted something. He has admitted it. Can you admit he has admitted it or are you back to running?
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Go tater tot nipplesAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:43 pmI've told you that repeatedly. You could at any time have challenged the statement trump covered it up as untrue, in which case I'd have googled the widely known and publicly available information for you. See how much faster this can go if you participate?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:41 pmOk he covered up, but go on. Hey you've already added some, so we've both moved forward. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:32 pmHe has admitted drafting the false statement his son produced that he denied doing. As I have already told you.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:28 pmOh sorry, forgot the if. Should have read if he covered up....so go on.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:17 pmSo, the highly unethical thing was colluding with the russians, and you admit trump covered it up? And the high probability would be that he colluded too?you, no if wrote: Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
Come on, you're nearly there.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/02/poli ... index.html
So no need for the 'if' you threw in after realising you had admitted something. He has admitted it. Can you admit he has admitted it or are you back to running?
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
I understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:00 pmGo tater tot nipplesAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:43 pmI've told you that repeatedly. You could at any time have challenged the statement trump covered it up as untrue, in which case I'd have googled the widely known and publicly available information for you. See how much faster this can go if you participate?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:41 pmOk he covered up, but go on. Hey you've already added some, so we've both moved forward. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:32 pmHe has admitted drafting the false statement his son produced that he denied doing. As I have already told you.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:28 pmOh sorry, forgot the if. Should have read if he covered up....so go on.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:17 pm
So, the highly unethical thing was colluding with the russians, and you admit trump covered it up? And the high probability would be that he colluded too?
Come on, you're nearly there.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/02/poli ... index.html
So no need for the 'if' you threw in after realising you had admitted something. He has admitted it. Can you admit he has admitted it or are you back to running?
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
GoAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:01 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:00 pmGo tater tot nipplesAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:43 pmI've told you that repeatedly. You could at any time have challenged the statement trump covered it up as untrue, in which case I'd have googled the widely known and publicly available information for you. See how much faster this can go if you participate?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:41 pmOk he covered up, but go on. Hey you've already added some, so we've both moved forward. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:32 pmHe has admitted drafting the false statement his son produced that he denied doing. As I have already told you.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:28 pm
Oh sorry, forgot the if. Should have read if he covered up....so go on.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/02/poli ... index.html
So no need for the 'if' you threw in after realising you had admitted something. He has admitted it. Can you admit he has admitted it or are you back to running?
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
I understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:02 pmGoAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:01 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:00 pmGo tater tot nipplesAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:43 pmI've told you that repeatedly. You could at any time have challenged the statement trump covered it up as untrue, in which case I'd have googled the widely known and publicly available information for you. See how much faster this can go if you participate?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:41 pmOk he covered up, but go on. Hey you've already added some, so we've both moved forward. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:32 pm
He has admitted drafting the false statement his son produced that he denied doing. As I have already told you.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/02/poli ... index.html
So no need for the 'if' you threw in after realising you had admitted something. He has admitted it. Can you admit he has admitted it or are you back to running?
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
So what you are saying is, I can look at evidence objectively without bias. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:06 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:02 pmGoAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:01 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:00 pmGo tater tot nipplesAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:43 pmI've told you that repeatedly. You could at any time have challenged the statement trump covered it up as untrue, in which case I'd have googled the widely known and publicly available information for you. See how much faster this can go if you participate?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:41 pm
Ok he covered up, but go on. Hey you've already added some, so we've both moved forward. So go.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
No, you can't. It's taken 12 pages to get you to admit you can see evidence, and you still can't bring yourself to admit what that evidence shows.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:07 pmSo what you are saying is, I can look at evidence objectively without bias. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:06 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:02 pmGoAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:01 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:00 pmGo tater tot nipplesAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:43 pm
I've told you that repeatedly. You could at any time have challenged the statement trump covered it up as untrue, in which case I'd have googled the widely known and publicly available information for you. See how much faster this can go if you participate?
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
Are you now admitting the trump tower meeting was collusion between the campaign and the russian interference campaign you dismissed as a conspiracy theory? You've already admitted trump tried to cover it up and appear to have admitted that means a high probability he colluded as well. You want to pretend to be objective? Then why run from admitting what you have seen so far?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Of course I can. You don't think I can. But since you don't think so. I retract everything as bullshit fake media news. I honestly don't think he covered anything of significance. So start over. Where's your evidence Trump colluded?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:13 pmNo, you can't. It's taken 12 pages to get you to admit you can see evidence, and you still can't bring yourself to admit what that evidence shows.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:07 pmSo what you are saying is, I can look at evidence objectively without bias. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:06 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:02 pmGoAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:01 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
Are you now admitting the trump tower meeting was collusion between the campaign and the russian interference campaign you dismissed as a conspiracy theory? You've already admitted trump tried to cover it up and appear to have admitted that means a high probability he colluded as well. You want to pretend to be objective? Then why run from admitting what you have seen so far?
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
See? And you claim you can objectively look at evidencenecronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:31 pmOf course I can. You don't think I can. But since you don't think so. I retract everything as bullshit fake media news. I honestly don't think he covered anything of significance. So start over. Where's your evidence Trump colluded?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:13 pmNo, you can't. It's taken 12 pages to get you to admit you can see evidence, and you still can't bring yourself to admit what that evidence shows.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:07 pmSo what you are saying is, I can look at evidence objectively without bias. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:06 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:02 pmGoAnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:01 pm
I understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
Are you now admitting the trump tower meeting was collusion between the campaign and the russian interference campaign you dismissed as a conspiracy theory? You've already admitted trump tried to cover it up and appear to have admitted that means a high probability he colluded as well. You want to pretend to be objective? Then why run from admitting what you have seen so far?
When you stop running this time, here is where we've got to -
I understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
Can you admit the progress we've made so far?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Nope, taking this bitch back. Wheres evidence Trump colluded?I have no idea what you wrote. Not even reading it now unless it says this is the evidence Trump colluded. Your false accusations, your lack of knowledge of me but thinking you know me..you want this person, here he is. Take the bitch back. Start over chief. You have nothing. It's all going to be a lie anyway. Made up fake news. So go. What you got?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:39 pmSee? And you claim you can objectively look at evidencenecronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:31 pmOf course I can. You don't think I can. But since you don't think so. I retract everything as bullshit fake media news. I honestly don't think he covered anything of significance. So start over. Where's your evidence Trump colluded?AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:13 pmNo, you can't. It's taken 12 pages to get you to admit you can see evidence, and you still can't bring yourself to admit what that evidence shows.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:07 pmSo what you are saying is, I can look at evidence objectively without bias. So go.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 1:06 pmI understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
Are you now admitting the trump tower meeting was collusion between the campaign and the russian interference campaign you dismissed as a conspiracy theory? You've already admitted trump tried to cover it up and appear to have admitted that means a high probability he colluded as well. You want to pretend to be objective? Then why run from admitting what you have seen so far?
When you stop running this time, here is where we've got to -
I understand, you've made some progress and now need to run away for a few more pages. Don't worry, we'll get there.
So now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campagin did something, trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
Can you admit the progress we've made so far?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Also no collusion in the tower. Wheres the evidence on trump?
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
It's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're back into running away mode. But it only took 12 pages for you to get here, and in 12 more who knows where we'll be.
So,
Now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campaign did 'something', trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
If you want to deny now that trump tower meeting was collusion, that's kinda progress too. Does make you look kinda silly saying trump covering it up meant a high probabilty of his collusion, but even so. At least you are then admitting you will deny collusion no matter what. So are you denying that meeting someone from the russian government offering help with the election constitutes collusion with their interference campaign?
So,
Now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campaign did 'something', trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
If you want to deny now that trump tower meeting was collusion, that's kinda progress too. Does make you look kinda silly saying trump covering it up meant a high probabilty of his collusion, but even so. At least you are then admitting you will deny collusion no matter what. So are you denying that meeting someone from the russian government offering help with the election constitutes collusion with their interference campaign?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
No homie. No collusion in the meeting. Nothing to cover up. Wheres the evidence of Trump's collusion. None. I got it. Still not reading what you wrote, I'm just starting from where you thought I was going to anyway. Run away from providing proof. It's cool. Fake news is fake news right. All this conspiracy theory you're spewing. Go. Prove Trump colluded. Oh you can't. Game over bitch.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 2:36 pm It's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're back into running away mode. But it only took 12 pages for you to get here, and in 12 more who knows where we'll be.
So,
Now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campaign did 'something', trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
If you want to deny now that trump tower meeting was collusion, that's kinda progress too. Does make you look kinda silly saying trump covering it up meant a high probabilty of his collusion, but even so. At least you are then admitting you will deny collusion no matter what. So are you denying that meeting someone from the russian government offering help with the election constitutes collusion with their interference campaign?
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
It's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're back into running away mode. But it only took 12 pages for you to get here, and in 12 more who knows where we'll be.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 3:53 pm No homie. No collusion in the meeting. Nothing to cover up. Wheres the evidence of Trump's collusion. None. I got it. Still not reading what you wrote, I'm just starting from where you thought I was going to anyway. Run away from providing proof. It's cool. Fake news is fake news right. All this conspiracy theory you're spewing. Go. Prove Trump colluded. Oh you can't. Game over bitch.
Now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campaign did 'something', trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
If you want to deny now that trump tower meeting was collusion, that's kinda progress too. Does make you look kinda silly saying trump covering it up meant a high probabilty of his collusion, but even so. At least you are then admitting you will deny collusion no matter what. So are you denying that meeting someone from the russian government offering help with the election constitutes collusion with their interference campaign?
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Fake news. Still not reading any of it so wasted bandwidth. Just need Trump's collusion. Thanks. Woohoo trump 2020-2024,2028. Fuck liberals.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 4:37 pmIt's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're back into running away mode. But it only took 12 pages for you to get here, and in 12 more who knows where we'll be.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 3:53 pm No homie. No collusion in the meeting. Nothing to cover up. Wheres the evidence of Trump's collusion. None. I got it. Still not reading what you wrote, I'm just starting from where you thought I was going to anyway. Run away from providing proof. It's cool. Fake news is fake news right. All this conspiracy theory you're spewing. Go. Prove Trump colluded. Oh you can't. Game over bitch.
Now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campaign did 'something', trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
If you want to deny now that trump tower meeting was collusion, that's kinda progress too. Does make you look kinda silly saying trump covering it up meant a high probabilty of his collusion, but even so. At least you are then admitting you will deny collusion no matter what. So are you denying that meeting someone from the russian government offering help with the election constitutes collusion with their interference campaign?
Why speak rational with you. You already know what I'm going to say right? And think. So why keep going? I've asked my question. Answer it. Otherwise, wasting time. I'm going to play the part you think I am instead of attempting honestly listening to you. For the record no shits given. However you want to answer is cool. I'm here for the trolling now. You've taken away any kind of interest in this. So as long as you don't answer EXACTLY Trump's collusion proof you'll get a response just like this. For as long as you want. This will be our new tradition. I will never admit any kind of collusion by anyone unless you present proof of Trump's collusion. You can type any shit you want. My wife will still suck my dick later. So no skin off my teeth. Answer or don't but this is it for me until you can give me evidence. This is the only type of responses you'll get.
So let's go commie liberal socialist. Bring on the fake news.
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
It's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're having a bit of a melty temper tantrum across multiple threads and denying your own words, but I want to focus on the progress we have made together. You plucky lil' fella.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:54 pmFake news. Still not reading any of it so wasted bandwidth. Just need Trump's collusion. Thanks. Woohoo trump 2020-2024,2028. Fuck liberals.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 4:37 pmIt's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're back into running away mode. But it only took 12 pages for you to get here, and in 12 more who knows where we'll be.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 3:53 pm No homie. No collusion in the meeting. Nothing to cover up. Wheres the evidence of Trump's collusion. None. I got it. Still not reading what you wrote, I'm just starting from where you thought I was going to anyway. Run away from providing proof. It's cool. Fake news is fake news right. All this conspiracy theory you're spewing. Go. Prove Trump colluded. Oh you can't. Game over bitch.
Now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campaign did 'something', trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
If you want to deny now that trump tower meeting was collusion, that's kinda progress too. Does make you look kinda silly saying trump covering it up meant a high probabilty of his collusion, but even so. At least you are then admitting you will deny collusion no matter what. So are you denying that meeting someone from the russian government offering help with the election constitutes collusion with their interference campaign?
Why speak rational with you. You already know what I'm going to say right? And think. So why keep going? I've asked my question. Answer it. Otherwise, wasting time. I'm going to play the part you think I am instead of attempting honestly listening to you. For the record no shits given. However you want to answer is cool. I'm here for the trolling now. You've taken away any kind of interest in this. So as long as you don't answer EXACTLY Trump's collusion proof you'll get a response just like this. For as long as you want. This will be our new tradition. I will never admit any kind of collusion by anyone unless you present proof of Trump's collusion. You can type any shit you want. My wife will still suck my dick later. So no skin off my teeth. Answer or don't but this is it for me until you can give me evidence. This is the only type of responses you'll get.
So let's go commie liberal socialist. Bring on the fake news.
You have admitted the 'campaign did something' with the trump tower meeting, but can't quite face saying what that was, but have admitted Trump covered it up, and declared that means a very high probability that Trump colluded. It was really good progress. We're gonna take a look at the evidence trump knew of the meeting just as soon as you can identify what it was the campaign did. I think what you need is a good night's sleep, and we'll continue our work tomorrow.
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Hey hombre, trump collusion evidence only none of that fancy fake news stuff that your dick flickers for.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 7:06 pmIt's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're having a bit of a melty temper tantrum across multiple threads and denying your own words, but I want to focus on the progress we have made together. You plucky lil' fella.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:54 pmFake news. Still not reading any of it so wasted bandwidth. Just need Trump's collusion. Thanks. Woohoo trump 2020-2024,2028. Fuck liberals.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 4:37 pmIt's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're back into running away mode. But it only took 12 pages for you to get here, and in 12 more who knows where we'll be.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 3:53 pm No homie. No collusion in the meeting. Nothing to cover up. Wheres the evidence of Trump's collusion. None. I got it. Still not reading what you wrote, I'm just starting from where you thought I was going to anyway. Run away from providing proof. It's cool. Fake news is fake news right. All this conspiracy theory you're spewing. Go. Prove Trump colluded. Oh you can't. Game over bitch.
Now you admit trump covered up the trump tower meeting 'because his campaign did something', which you call highly unethical and declare means there is a high probability he colluded. Presumably because you further finally admit the meeting itself was collusion? And we aren't even done with the first plank yet, next up is the evidence trump did know about the meeting. Just as soon as you admit the meeting was collusion. Come on, you're so close. The campaign did 'something', trump covered it up and that means there's a high probability he colluded. So what did the campaign do?
If you want to deny now that trump tower meeting was collusion, that's kinda progress too. Does make you look kinda silly saying trump covering it up meant a high probabilty of his collusion, but even so. At least you are then admitting you will deny collusion no matter what. So are you denying that meeting someone from the russian government offering help with the election constitutes collusion with their interference campaign?
Why speak rational with you. You already know what I'm going to say right? And think. So why keep going? I've asked my question. Answer it. Otherwise, wasting time. I'm going to play the part you think I am instead of attempting honestly listening to you. For the record no shits given. However you want to answer is cool. I'm here for the trolling now. You've taken away any kind of interest in this. So as long as you don't answer EXACTLY Trump's collusion proof you'll get a response just like this. For as long as you want. This will be our new tradition. I will never admit any kind of collusion by anyone unless you present proof of Trump's collusion. You can type any shit you want. My wife will still suck my dick later. So no skin off my teeth. Answer or don't but this is it for me until you can give me evidence. This is the only type of responses you'll get.
So let's go commie liberal socialist. Bring on the fake news.
You have admitted the 'campaign did something' with the trump tower meeting, but can't quite face saying what that was, but have admitted Trump covered it up, and declared that means a very high probability that Trump colluded. It was really good progress. We're gonna take a look at the evidence trump knew of the meeting just as soon as you can identify what it was the campaign did. I think what you need is a good night's sleep, and we'll continue our work tomorrow.
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Alrighty Mulvaney, done melting?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:41 pmHey hombre, trump collusion evidence only none of that fancy fake news stuff that your dick flickers for.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 7:06 pm
It's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're having a bit of a melty temper tantrum across multiple threads and denying your own words, but I want to focus on the progress we have made together. You plucky lil' fella.
You have admitted the 'campaign did something' with the trump tower meeting, but can't quite face saying what that was, but have admitted Trump covered it up, and declared that means a very high probability that Trump colluded. It was really good progress. We're gonna take a look at the evidence trump knew of the meeting just as soon as you can identify what it was the campaign did. I think what you need is a good night's sleep, and we'll continue our work tomorrow.
So here is where we got to before you had a wobbly:
So, his 'campaign did something', you admit he covered it up and say it was 'highly unethical', and appear to be saying that means a high probability he colluded. So close, take it across the line. What was the something that the campaign did?you wrote:Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
- necronomous
- Official UJR Trolling Czar
- Posts: 7948
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 12:42 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Had no wobbly. Trump's collusion evidence ole chap. No false newsAnalHamster wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:10 amAlrighty Mulvaney, done melting?necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:41 pmHey hombre, trump collusion evidence only none of that fancy fake news stuff that your dick flickers for.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 7:06 pm
It's alright lil' buddy. I understand it was difficult for you to come this far and now you're having a bit of a melty temper tantrum across multiple threads and denying your own words, but I want to focus on the progress we have made together. You plucky lil' fella.
You have admitted the 'campaign did something' with the trump tower meeting, but can't quite face saying what that was, but have admitted Trump covered it up, and declared that means a very high probability that Trump colluded. It was really good progress. We're gonna take a look at the evidence trump knew of the meeting just as soon as you can identify what it was the campaign did. I think what you need is a good night's sleep, and we'll continue our work tomorrow.
So here is where we got to before you had a wobbly:So, his 'campaign did something', you admit he covered it up and say it was 'highly unethical', and appear to be saying that means a high probability he colluded. So close, take it across the line. What was the something that the campaign did?you wrote:Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.
- AnalHamster
- Doctor Chaser
- Posts: 6471
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm
Re: Democrat/Socialist Movement-Have We Arrived?
Well you pulled a mulvaney trying to walk back what you just admitted then derped insults at me in a few unrelated threads, so yes, you the a wobbly. If you need another day running away that's fine.
So here is where we got to before you had a wobbly:
So here is where we got to before you had a wobbly:
So, his 'campaign did something', you admit he covered it up and say it was 'highly unethical', and appear to be saying that means a high probability he colluded. So close, take it across the line. What was the something that the campaign did?you wrote:Honestly, it's not just that incident. I just want to hear it all. That's just one piece. Covering up the fact afterwards, because his campaign did something is highly unethical, but it doesn't prove he directly colluded. I can see the lines you connected to get there and it's a high probability he did, but that is not evidence he did. I can easily say he was not aware of his campaigns dealings. Sometimes, people go behind their bosses backs. Any lawyer worth his salt could make that not stick. Hating trump and him being an asshole does not mean he colluded in this incident no matter how it presents itself.