No, Chansley Was Not Escorted Into the Capitol Building

[Marener]

There absolutely was a discovery violation; and in this case it is a failure to turnover Constitutionally required Brady material

And you know this how?

 

[XponentialChaos]

XponentialChaos

Go look again at post 260. You fucking dopey dildo.

“But it doesn’t speak to the alleged intent to impede any official proceeding.”

You’re trying really hard to pivot to “intent”. I asked you if it was impeded, not if there was intent to impede it. What a desperate and pathetic attempt to squirm away from answering a simple question.

Answer the question this time you little bitch.

Was the official proceeding obstructed or impeded? Yes or no.

 

[Faun]

See.

Buttercup still running around down his rabbit hole of dumbassery.

LOLOLOL

By that whine, you mean proving you lied.

 

[Faun]

Scary pointy flag pole that makes Fawnboi shit his Depends.

More whining from the forum dumbfuck who can't stop lying.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Sure, but you misrepresented what happened

I did no such thing. Stop apologizing for destructive behavior.

 

[Faun]

Nice spin there.
Why weren't the "insurrectionists" hand cuffed and hauled away?
Why did the "insurrectionists" thank and praise the Police on their way out?
Why was this footage not released to the public and we're only seeing it now?

Spin away, Spawn. DANCE!!!!

Because that could come later. Their priority then was clearing out the Capitol without resistance so that Congress could get back in and resume certifying the election.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Yanno...............I'm thinking that BackAgain is a world class troll, because he spins everything in such an interesting way. Takes some intelligence to try to do that. And, I'm choosing to believe that he is an excellent troll, because I can't believe that anyone could post like they do and actually be stupid enough to believe it.

 

[BackAgain]

No, you didn’t. You’re lying.

Yes I did. And now you’re just lying some more.

Was the official proceeding obstructed or impeded? Yes or no.

Already answered.

Just one word needed to answer and you’re too much of a scared little bitch to answer.

Nah. I just already answered and You’re still retarded as well as a liar.

Just watch. Look at how easy it is to predict you spineless cowards. You’re going to prove me right once again.

I’ve never proved you right. That would require that you be right. But you’re consistently wrong as well as being a lying retard.

Go on. Let’s see it. Don’t run off, prove me right again.

Impossible. I’ve consistently proved you wrong. Plus, of course, you’re a liar.

 

[BackAgain]

I did no such thing. Stop apologizing for destructive behavior.

Your thread headline is indeed an mischaracterization.

 

[BackAgain]

And you know this how?

Because they didn’t turn it over. Fuck sake, you moron, even the prosecution doesn’t claim that they had ever turned it over to the defense. And worse yet, the defense lawyer had clearly and explicitly demanded it. And of course, it was Brady material.

 

[BackAgain]

“But it doesn’t speak to the alleged intent to impede any official proceeding.”

You’re trying really hard to pivot to “intent”. I asked you if it was impeded, not if there was intent to impede it. What a desperate and pathetic attempt to squirm away from answering a simple question.

Answer the question this time you little bitch.

Was the official proceeding obstructed or impeded? Yes or no.

I’m trying to educate your pathetically ignorant ass. As I’ve said at least a couple of times already. the proceedings were impeded by a few hours. And once again, you need to establish more than his presence there and the fact that the certification was delayed a bit in order to make the case. Not just making the empty claim. You’d be required to prove it via evidence. Evidence which you don’t have.

 

[Marener]

Because they didn’t turn it over. Fuck sake, you moron, even the prosecution doesn’t claim that they had ever turned it over to the defense. And worse yet, the defense lawyer had clearly and explicitly demanded it. And of course, it was Brady material.

It’s not Brady material if it’s not exculpatory. I don’t think it’s exculpatory but we don’t have to argue that.

When you say it wasn’t turned over, how do you know? You don’t actually know that, you’re just saying it and demanding I believe it even though you can’t tell me why I should believe it.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Yes I did. And now you’re just lying some more.

Already answered.

Nah. I just already answered and You’re still retarded as well as a liar.

I’ve never proved you right. That would require that you be right. But you’re consistently wrong as well as being a lying retard.

Impossible. I’ve consistently proved you wrong. Plus, of course, you’re a liar.

And look at that. After all that, not one yes or no in that entire post. Look how easy you are to predict.

Look at how pathetic you are in trying to tap-dance out of answering.

 

[BackAgain]

It’s not Brady material if it’s not exculpatory.

I agree with that statement.

I don’t think it’s exculpatory but we don’t have to argue that.

I do believe it’s exculpatory. I’m sure the defense sees it as exculpatory. And the determination is supposed to be made by the defense, not by the prosecutor.

When you say it wasn’t turned over, how do you know?

Because the House had the tapes and only just released them. The defense promptly objected that the prosecutors had failed to turn them over. (And there is no question that possession is imputed to the prosecutors since they were in the “Government’s” possession.) Plus, at no point since then have the prosecutors denied that it hasn’t been turned over.

You don’t actually know that, you’re just saying it and demanding I believe it even though you can’t tell me why I should believe it.

False. See above. I don’t care what you choose to shut your eyes to. That’s just pathetic of you.

 

[BackAgain]

And look at that. After all that, not one yes or no in that entire post. Look how easy you are to predict.

Look at how pathetic you are in trying to tap-dance out of answering.

Already answered. Your little sissy hissy fit doesn’t change that fact for a second.

One doesn’t tap dance out of answering when one has already answered, you fucking retard.

 

[XponentialChaos]

As I’ve said at least a couple of times already. the proceedings were impeded by a few hours.

Excellent, so the proceedings were impeded. We agree. a simple yes would have sufficed instead of making yourself look like an idiot.

Next question: Did people breaking into and marching through the Capitol cause the official proceedings to be impeded? Yes or no.

(This is the part where you desperately try to tap-dance out of answering again.)

 

[XponentialChaos]

Already answered. Your little sissy hissy fit doesn’t change that fact for a second.

One doesn’t tap dance out of answering when one has already answered, you fucking retard.

A simple “yes” would have sufficed you scared pussy.

 

[BackAgain]

Excellent, so the proceedings were impeded. We agree. a simple yes would have sufficed instead of making yourself look like an idiot.

Long since answered. You also don’t get to demand yea or no answers to your arbitrary “questions.” Do try to smarten up.

Next question: Did people breaking into and marching through the Capitol cause the official proceedings to be impeded? Yes or no.

Some did, apparently. Also already answered.

(This is the part where you desperately try to tap-dance out of answering again.)

No. It was the part where you repeated your previous lies — yet again.

 

[BackAgain]

A simple “yes” would have sufficed you scared pussy.

No. My answer sufficed, you pussy retarded hack bitch.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Some did, apparently. Also already answered.

Which ones impeded the official proceeding?