Jan 6th Commission About To Issue Invitations To Get Down!

[jc456]

Thank you for explaining that to the idiot.

what's your fantasy?

 

[BackAgain]

Why do you cornholes presume to make yourselves arbiters?

"Bring me your evidence for my approval!"

We're gonna skip that crap and go directly to someone whose opinion is far better qualified, and informed by direct experience.

Is this getting through?

Why do you libtarded ass-suckers think that you’re immune from having to support your assertions? And why do you believe you can’t be held to the rules of logic?

You are one very petty retarded coward.

If you could grasp even that much you’d begin to understand why the board laughs at you.

 

[jc456]

He insisted, I answered.

But it's not about me.

right? it's about everyone else. I get it. You are intimidated by internet message boarders.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Why do you libtarded ass-suckers think that you’re immune from having to support your assertions? And why do you believe you can’t be held to the rules of logic?

You are one very petty retarded coward.

If you could grasp even that much you’d begin to understand why the board laughs at you.

I made an unambiguous offer to support it.

With informed opinion.

I don't think I could be more clear.

 

[The5thHorseman]

right? it's about everyone else. I get it. You are intimidated by internet message boarders.

That doesn't follow.

Linear reasoning is not your jam.

 

[BackAgain]

I made an unambiguous offer to support it.

With informed opinion.

I don't think I could be more clear.

Don’t offer. Don’t be a troll and don’t try to think. It doesn’t work for you.

If you think that you can support any of your assertions, no offer is required. Just do so.

Also, although you apparently don’t know this, it’s still true. “Supporting” your assertions with opinions doesn’t qualify as “support.”

You’re welcome.

 

[The5thHorseman]

well simpleton, if you have it why won't you show it then? avoidance is an indication you lie.

I don't have to.


I can skip that step because you aren't qualified to determine the value of such evidence.

Nod if this concept is penetrating.

Now:

"There's no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day," McConnell said


he is an attorney, eye witness and victim.

You're another uninformed douche on the innertubes.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Don’t offer. Don’t be a troll and don’t try to think. It doesn’t work for you.

If you think that you can support any of your assertions, no offer is required. Just do so.

Also, although you apparently don’t know this, it’s still true. “Supporting” your assertions with opinions doesn’t qualify as “support.”

You’re welcome.

Let's cut to the quick...someone said you were once a lawyer.


How are the facts determining his guilt established?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Do you have a rebuttal? I mean, I stated a fact, either you have something to refute or you don't. I'm not trying to hide anything.

You’ve refuted yourself and are now trying to posture your way out of being such a tool.

 

[BackAgain]

Let's cut to the quick...someone said you were once a lawyer.


How are the facts determining his guilt established?

Let’s cut to the chase.

If you are the proponent of an assertion, you have the burden of proof.

Stop equivocating. Just support your assertions — if you can.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Lol, doesn't take a genius to see what this investigation was about, hell, they telegraphed it from the very beginning of trumps presidency.

Are these the "facts" to which you are now referring?

 

[The5thHorseman]

Let’s cut to the chase.

If you are the proponent of an assertion, you have the burden of proof.

Stop equivocating. Just support your assertions — if you can.

I reject you as arbiter.

Read that again.


Do you understand it now?

 

[BackAgain]

I reject you as arbiter.

Read that again.


Do you understand it now?

Nobody cares what or who you reject.

You can be as evasive as you wish (which is evidently pretty much boundless). But you can never escape the fundamental proposition that the proponent of an assertion carries the burden.

That you are a spineless, gutless, gonad-less quivering pussy isn’t in doubt. But feel free to continue to highlight that fact.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Nobody cares what or who you reject.

You can be as evasive as you wish (which is evidently pretty much boundless). But you can never escape the fundamental proposition that the proponent of an assertion carries the burden.

That you are a spineless, gutless, gonad-less quivering pussy isn’t in doubt. But feel free to continue to highlight that fact.

But I'm NOT evasive. I've not only specified the evidence I'll provide in this instance, I've already posted it.

Not only can't I get you to stipulate to any facts, you won't even explain what you mean by the word.

If you think you are running chops, you better find them first.

 

[BackAgain]

But I'm NOT evasive. I've not only specified the evidence I'll provide in this instance, I've already posted it.

No. You haven’t.

Not only can't I get you to stipulate to any facts, you won't even explain what you mean by the word.

You have to actually offer a fact before you can ask for a stipulation.

If you think you are running chops, you better find them first.

If you think you make coherent sentences, you need to rethink everything in your universe.

 

[The5thHorseman]

No. You haven’t.

You have to actually offer a fact before you can ask for a stipulation.

If you think you make coherent sentences, you need to rethink everything in your universe.

We're gonna skip that crap and go directly to someone whose opinion is far better qualified, and informed by direct experience.

Is this getting through?

Apparently it didn't.

Someone posted something about you being or having been one. To establish whether or not that is a fact, I asked you to stipulate.

you make coherent sentences, you need to rethink everything in your universe.

Sure...I urge you to skip that xit.

 

[BackAgain]

We're gonna skip that crap and go directly to someone whose opinion is far better qualified, and informed by direct experience.

Is this getting through?

Apparently it didn't.

Someone posted something about you being or having been one. To establish whether or not that is a fact, I asked you to stipulate.

you make coherent sentences, you need to rethink everything in your universe.

Sure...I urge you to skip that xit.

You still don’t get it. I didn’t really expect you to. You’ve established how ignorant and silly and petty and stupid you are already.

Try to follow along. Im not interested in playing your childish games. You move ploddingly to have me respond in your off topic direction. But, you see, this thread isn’t about me. Nor is it about you. Thus, get it through your petty skull. Your deflection efforts are wasted.

There is but one thing for you to do. Make your assertion if you are so inclined but feel obligated to the. support it with facts and whatever passes for logic in your world.

You make the assertion. The burden is (and remains) on you.

 

[The5thHorseman]

You still don’t get it. I didn’t really expect you to. You’ve established how ignorant and silly and petty and stupid you are already.

Try to follow along. Im not interested in playing your childish games. You move ploddingly to have me respond in your off topic direction. But, you see, this thread isn’t about me. Nor is it about you. Thus, get it through your petty skull. Your deflection efforts are wasted.

There is but one thing for you to do. Make your assertion if you are so inclined but feel obligated to the. support it with facts and whatever passes for logic in your world.

You make the assertion. The burden is (and remains) on you.

Try to follow along. Im not interested in playing your childish games


I don't want to play yours.

If you're going to oblige me to do the work, you'll have to explain your rules.

 

[BackAgain]

Try to follow along. Im not interested in playing your childish games


I don't want to play yours.

If you're going to oblige me to do the work, you'll have to explain your rules.

Damn, kid. You’re dull.

Im not playing any games. Im just calling bullshit on you.

Once again, for your retarded brain:

You, as the proponent of an assertion, have the burden of proof.

Of course, you’re free to just make assertions without offering any support in facts or logic. Nobody expects better from a dimwit such as you. But, when you wish to someday be taken seriously, the rule isn’t subject to your whim: The proponent carries the burden.

 

[ThisIsMe]

You’ve refuted yourself and are now trying to posture your way out of being such a tool.

I have? Please elaborate. Where have I refuted myself?