Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

[Ghost of a Rider]

You made some shit up. And you were wrong. Learn a lesson.

What shit did I make up?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What shit did I make up?

Your amateur autopsy.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Your amateur autopsy.

Be specific. What did I say that contradicts the official autopsy or is "made up"?

 

[XponentialChaos]

The stamina this guy has!

Pointing out the lie that you’re too much of a bitch to respond to. Sure. It’s my pleasure.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Pointing out the lie that you’re too much of a bitch to respond to. Sure. It’s my pleasure.

This is you bitching about me not answering a question, Post #493:

"Look at how much you avoided answering."
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

And Post #498:

"I’m fully aware that those are equivalent. What was unclear to me was whether you realized those are equivalent. Considering how many times I had to ask you that very question…"
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

I started to ask my own questions just before the one above, which you then proceeded to hypocritically ignore.

Me in Post #496:

"Wait a minute, what logic are you referring to?"
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

Me in Post #526:

"You didn’t answer my question: What logic were you referring to?"

Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

Me in Post #528:

"1.) If you know and have already acknowledged that my doubt has nothing to do with his expertise, why do you think it’s relevant to my argument?

2.) Once again, you said I have “an inability to use simple logic”, what logic are you referring to?"

Me in Post #534:
"Are you going to answer my questions or not?"

Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

Then in Post #573 I finally said:

"Tell you what, I’ll elaborate on my position when you answer my questions."
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

That's when you said in Post #574:

"1.) I don’t know because I don’t know if I have a good grasp on your argument. If his expertise isn’t relevant to your argument, well then it probably should be.

2.) This has already been answered.

Seems like these questions of yours are just an attempt to muddy the conversation, to argue about nothing, which I’m not interested in."

And then Post #598

"I tried to answer your question to the best of my ability because you said you would elaborate on your position if I did."

A few observations:

1.) I had to ask you to answer the one question about logic four fucking times.

2.) I had to bribe you just to get the half-assed "I don't understand your argument" response out of you. And you as much as admitted that the only reason you responded was because I bribed you.

3.) When you said you didn't understand my argument, that was your first response to the question. It wasn't until later that you said you didn't believe me when I said I didn't question Baker's competence. So your first response renders this argument as complete and utter bullshit.

You changed your approach to the question from first pleading ignorance to saying you didn't believe me, all so you could avoid answering it.

4.) When you said "already answered" to the question about logic, this was a lie because you avoided answering it four times only to then tell me you already answered it.

On top of all this, you kept changing your own question to where it ended up being three or four different questions.

You're a hypocrite.

 

[XponentialChaos]

This is you bitching about me not answering a question, Post #493:

"Look at how much you avoided answering."
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

And Post #498:

"I’m fully aware that those are equivalent. What was unclear to me was whether you realized those are equivalent. Considering how many times I had to ask you that very question…"
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

I started to ask my own questions just before the one above, which you then proceeded to hypocritically ignore.

Me in Post #496:

"Wait a minute, what logic are you referring to?"
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

Me in Post #526:

"You didn’t answer my question: What logic were you referring to?"

Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

Me in Post #528:

"1.) If you know and have already acknowledged that my doubt has nothing to do with his expertise, why do you think it’s relevant to my argument?

2.) Once again, you said I have “an inability to use simple logic”, what logic are you referring to?"

Me in Post #534:
"Are you going to answer my questions or not?"

Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

Then in Post #573 I finally said:

"Tell you what, I’ll elaborate on my position when you answer my questions."
Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

That's when you said in Post #574:

"1.) I don’t know because I don’t know if I have a good grasp on your argument. If his expertise isn’t relevant to your argument, well then it probably should be.

2.) This has already been answered.

Seems like these questions of yours are just an attempt to muddy the conversation, to argue about nothing, which I’m not interested in."

And then Post #598

"I tried to answer your question to the best of my ability because you said you would elaborate on your position if I did."

A few observations:

1.) I had to ask you to answer the one question about logic four fucking times.

2.) I had to bribe you just to get the half-assed "I don't understand your argument" response out of you. And you as much as admitted that the only reason you responded was because I bribed you.

3.) When you said you didn't understand my argument, that was your first response to the question. It wasn't until later that you said you didn't believe me when I said I didn't question Baker's competence. So your first response renders this argument as complete and utter bullshit.

You changed your approach to the question from first pleading ignorance to saying you didn't believe me, all so you could avoid answering it.

4.) When you said "already answered" to the question about logic, this was a lie because you avoided answering it four times only to then tell me you already answered it.

On top of all this, you kept changing your own question to where it ended up being three or four different questions.

You're a hypocrite.

You‘re grasping at straws. You have nothing and you know you have nothing. You lost.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You‘re grasping at straws.

These "straws" give a step-by-step accounting of your hypocrisy. You bitched about my not answering questions then refused to respond to mine until bribed. You then as much as admitted to accepting a bribe, i.e., saying you only responded to my questions because I promised I would elaborate my position.

You then gave two contradictory reasons as to why you wouldn't answer.

Based on this discussion and after sifting through some of your posts in other discussions, I realized you get a seemingly sadistic satisfaction in firing questions like a nazi interrogator and demanding answers but alas, you are loathe to answer questions yourself and almost never do.

You're a craven hypocrite.

You have nothing and you know you have nothing. You lost.

You still can't prove the knee killed Floyd so, what did I lose?

 

[XponentialChaos]

These "straws" give a step-by-step accounting of your hypocrisy. You bitched about my not answering questions then refused to respond to mine until bribed. You then as much as admitted to accepting a bribe, i.e., saying you only responded to my questions because I promised I would elaborate my position.

You then gave two contradictory reasons as to why you wouldn't answer.

Based on this discussion and after sifting through some of your posts in other discussions, I realized you get a seemingly sadistic satisfaction in firing questions like a nazi interrogator and demanding answers but alas, you are loathe to answer questions yourself and almost never do.

You're a craven hypocrite.

You still can't prove the knee killed Floyd so, what did I lose?

That’s a whole lot of bullshit because you got caught in a lie that you don’t want to address lol. Do you even believe this bullshit of yours? You have proven that you would rather defend your lie, that you know is a lie, than admit you’re wrong. That’s your problem - you chose to be dishonest and you have destroyed your own credibility.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

That’s a whole lot of bullshit because you got caught in a lie that you don’t want to address lol.

Irrelevant. You did all this regardless of whether I lied or not.

Do you even believe this bullshit of yours?

Of course I do. It's all right there in black and white with links and quotes, laid out in chronological order.

Are you suggesting it didn't happen?

You have proven that you would rather defend your lie, that you know is a lie, than admit you’re wrong.

How exactly did I defend a lie?

That’s your problem - you chose to be dishonest and you have destroyed your own credibility.

What do you think your hypocrisy has done?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Irrelevant. You did all this regardless of whether I lied or not.

You did lie. I proved it. And all of this nonsense out of you is because you don't want to admit you got caught lying lol. When you prove you're a liar, nothing you say has any credibility whatsoever. Congratulations.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You did lie. I proved it.

Didn't say you didn't.

And all of this nonsense out of you is because you don't want to admit you got caught lying lol. When you prove you're a liar, nothing you say has any credibility whatsoever. Congratulations.

This "nonsense" actually happened; you avoided answering two of my questions after giving me shit for doing the same thing. Then you gave two contradictory answers only after being bribed to do so.

I'll ask again: Are you suggesting this didn't happen?

And how did I defend a lie?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Didn't say you didn't.

This "nonsense" actually happened; you avoided answering two of my questions after giving me shit for doing the same thing. Then you gave two contradictory answers only after being bribed to do so.

I'll ask again: Are you suggesting this didn't happen?

And how did I defend a lie?

I understand that your delicate ego won't allow you to admit you lied when you and I both know you lied, lol. It has been proven. Your little hissy fit isn't working. You lost.

 

[XponentialChaos]

My point is, I didn’t assume anything before the trial. You did.

You didn’t have an opinion on whether Chauvin killed Floyd or not?

No, I didn’t. I usually reserve judgment until more info comes out. Especially in cases like this when woke imbeciles want to hang someone just to make a point, rather than waste any time on guilt or innocence.

You less than a month after Floyd was killed:

"I think a combination of drugs, his heart condition and the stress of the situation caused him to have a heart attack. He very clearly did not want to get in the cruiser and getting arrested got him torqued up. I don't know why but whatever his reason was, he was willing to try to bullshit his way out of it.

I've no doubt he had trouble breathing but it wasn't because of anything Chauvin was doing.“

Proof.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I understand that your delicate ego won't allow you to admit you lied when you and I both know you lied, lol. It has been proven. Your little hissy fit isn't working. You lost.

This is only about proving that you are just as full of shit as anyone.

Now, answer the question: Are you suggesting you did not avoid answering my questions and that your two responses contradicted each other?

 

[XponentialChaos]

This is only about proving that you are just as full of shit as anyone.

Now, answer the question: Are you suggesting you did not avoid answering my questions and that your two responses contradicted each other?

And you can whine all you want – it doesn’t matter. You’ve shown that you won’t admit you’re wrong when you know you’re wrong. When you refuse to debate honestly, you’ve lost all credibility, and you've lost the debate.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

And you can whine all you want – it doesn’t matter. You’ve shown that you won’t admit you’re wrong when you know you’re wrong. When you refuse to debate honestly, you’ve lost all credibility, and you've lost the debate.

Whether or not I lied was not the debate. The debate was about what killed George Floyd. Unless you were able to prove the knee killed him, I haven't lost anything.

Now, again, answer the question: Are you suggesting you did not avoid answering my questions and that your two responses contradicted each other?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Whether or not I lied was not the debate.

You did lie. It has been proven. You know you did but you can’t admit it because of your delicate ego.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The debate was about what killed George Floyd.

The competent medical examiner says it was a homicide. You, someone with no medical experience and a proven liar, say you think he’s wrong. You lost that one a long time ago.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You did lie. It has been proven. You know you did but you can’t admit it because of your delicate ego.

Irrelevant. That's not what the debate was about so I didn't lose anything.

The competent medical examiner says it was a homicide. You, someone with no medical experience and a proven liar, say you think he’s wrong. You lost that one a long time ago.

No I didn't. Neither one of us proved a thing so I didn't lose anything, I just didn't win. Neither did you.

Now, again, answer the question: Are you suggesting you did not avoid answering my questions and that your two responses contradicted each other?

 

[XponentialChaos]

… I didn't lose anything…

And this is supposed to mean something coming from you? You’ve already proven you’re a liar and you’ve proven that you can’t admit you’re wrong when you know you’re wrong. With your delicate ego, you’re always going to say you didn’t lose, even when you know you lost. This is what happens to your credibility when you choose to be dishonest.