The Homosexual Dilemma

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

They're sexual abnormalities... that's the connection. They all share the connection that their reasoning is a perverse variant of human reasoning.

Would you go so far as to say Bill Cosby shares a link in that connection?

What does Bill Cosby have to do with this discussion?

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

They're sexual abnormalities... that's the connection. They all share the connection that their reasoning is a perverse variant of human reasoning.

Would you go so far as to say Bill Cosby shares a link in that connection?

LOL! What?

Ibhuh, dunbah knowbah whatbuh you be talkin the fuck aboutbuh.

Can you clairify?

Twenty-six plus women have accused Cosby of drugging them and raping them; the oldest being 71 years-old. Would you consider him to be a sexual deviant? And why is someone of your righteous status talking trash? Remember, you have a ticket on the first bus to Heaven.

26 accusations are still just accusations. Not proof. You don't get to cite Bill Cosby as an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. That doesn't fly here.

I hate bullies, so stop bullying me. As I've mentioned, if Cosby is an innocent little lamb, then he should stand before his accusers, look them in the eye, and call them liars. He can't do it because he's guilty.

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Would you go so far as to say Bill Cosby shares a link in that connection?

What does Bill Cosby have to do with this discussion?

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

Well, I feel I should interject here... we discuss rumors and accusations, all the time. We just usually do so because the intellectually less fortunate present them as fact.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This " Their premiums may be unchanged but their coverage is less, their deductibles are higher and they cannot use the doctors they choose" is mere opinion with no broad investigation.

If investigated, the quoted above becomes a lie.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Would you go so far as to say Bill Cosby shares a link in that connection?

LOL! What?

Ibhuh, dunbah knowbah whatbuh you be talkin the fuck aboutbuh.

Can you clairify?

Twenty-six plus women have accused Cosby of drugging them and raping them; the oldest being 71 years-old. Would you consider him to be a sexual deviant? And why is someone of your righteous status talking trash? Remember, you have a ticket on the first bus to Heaven.

26 accusations are still just accusations. Not proof. You don't get to cite Bill Cosby as an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. That doesn't fly here.

I hate bullies, so stop bullying me. As I've mentioned, if Cosby is an innocent little lamb, then he should stand before his accusers, look them in the eye, and call them liars. He can't do it because he's guilty.

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

Oh, fuck off, son, until you can talk honestly.

 

[Lilah]

Would you go so far as to say Bill Cosby shares a link in that connection?

What does Bill Cosby have to do with this discussion?

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

Haven't you yet learned that your bullying tactics serve only to make you look weak and impotent?
Men and women have been sentenced to prison for murder without proof of a body?
What's it to you if I choose to believe a 90 year-old man, who was an eyewitness to what Cosby was doing to harm women? Are you attempting to tell me what I can and cannot believe?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

What does Bill Cosby have to do with this discussion?

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

Well, I feel I should interject here... we discuss rumors and accusations, all the time. We just usually do so because the intellectually less fortunate present them as fact.

What she's trying to do is discuss Bill Cosby as a sexual deviant as if that were a foregone conclusion. There's a reason that virtuous people don't allow accusations to stand as proof, because anybody can be accused, and the more money you have (Bill Cosby) the more accusations will be made. We saw this play out with Michael Jackson who, after all was said and done, was not guilty of sexually abusing children. I never fall for it.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

What does Bill Cosby have to do with this discussion?

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

Haven't you yet learned that your bullying tactics serve only to make you look weak and impotent?
Men and women have been sentenced to prison for murder without proof of a body?
What's it to you if I choose to believe a 90 year-old man, who was an eyewitness to what Cosby was doing to harm women? Are you attempting to tell me what I can and cannot believe?

Accusations in the media are not courtroom convictions. Still too stupid to see the difference, I see. You're also hard up for actual proven cases of sexual deviants to fuel your arguments, so can we conclude at this point you have nothing?

 

[Lilah]

Would you go so far as to say Bill Cosby shares a link in that connection?

LOL! What?

Ibhuh, dunbah knowbah whatbuh you be talkin the fuck aboutbuh.

Can you clairify?

Twenty-six plus women have accused Cosby of drugging them and raping them; the oldest being 71 years-old. Would you consider him to be a sexual deviant? And why is someone of your righteous status talking trash? Remember, you have a ticket on the first bus to Heaven.

26 accusations are still just accusations. Not proof. You don't get to cite Bill Cosby as an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. That doesn't fly here.

I hate bullies, so stop bullying me. As I've mentioned, if Cosby is an innocent little lamb, then he should stand before his accusers, look them in the eye, and call them liars. He can't do it because he's guilty.

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

I don't have to prove Cosby's sexual deviant behavior; the witnesses have done that, including the 90 year-old man. If a person is not guilty of what he is being accused, he should come forward and face his accusers.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

LOL! What?

Ibhuh, dunbah knowbah whatbuh you be talkin the fuck aboutbuh.

Can you clairify?

Twenty-six plus women have accused Cosby of drugging them and raping them; the oldest being 71 years-old. Would you consider him to be a sexual deviant? And why is someone of your righteous status talking trash? Remember, you have a ticket on the first bus to Heaven.

26 accusations are still just accusations. Not proof. You don't get to cite Bill Cosby as an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. That doesn't fly here.

I hate bullies, so stop bullying me. As I've mentioned, if Cosby is an innocent little lamb, then he should stand before his accusers, look them in the eye, and call them liars. He can't do it because he's guilty.

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

I don't have to prove Cosby's sexual deviant behavior; the witnesses have done that, including the 90 year-old man. If a person is not guilty of what he is being accused, he should come forward and face his accusers.

Wrong again. People who are accused are not under obligation to answer their accusers. The burden of proof rests on the accusers alone. And you just idiotically claimed yet again that somebody's accusation was "proof". You just said it and I wanted to get it in quotes before you could edit your post. Aren't you embarrassed to expose your stupidity like that? I guess stupidity and shamelessness in the exhibition of ignorance go hand in hand.

 

[Lilah]

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

Haven't you yet learned that your bullying tactics serve only to make you look weak and impotent?
Men and women have been sentenced to prison for murder without proof of a body?
What's it to you if I choose to believe a 90 year-old man, who was an eyewitness to what Cosby was doing to harm women? Are you attempting to tell me what I can and cannot believe?

Accusations in the media are not courtroom convictions. Still too stupid to see the difference, I see. You're also hard up for actual proven cases of sexual deviants to fuel your arguments, so can we conclude at this point you have nothing?

Again, I believe the women and the 90 year-old man. Did you believe Sandusky?

 

[Lilah]

Twenty-six plus women have accused Cosby of drugging them and raping them; the oldest being 71 years-old. Would you consider him to be a sexual deviant? And why is someone of your righteous status talking trash? Remember, you have a ticket on the first bus to Heaven.

26 accusations are still just accusations. Not proof. You don't get to cite Bill Cosby as an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. That doesn't fly here.

I hate bullies, so stop bullying me. As I've mentioned, if Cosby is an innocent little lamb, then he should stand before his accusers, look them in the eye, and call them liars. He can't do it because he's guilty.

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

I don't have to prove Cosby's sexual deviant behavior; the witnesses have done that, including the 90 year-old man. If a person is not guilty of what he is being accused, he should come forward and face his accusers.

Wrong again. People who are accused are not under obligation to answer their accusers. The burden of proof rests on the accusers alone. And you just idiotically claimed yet again that somebody's accusation was "proof". You just said it and I wanted to get it in quotes before you could edit your post. Aren't you embarrassed to expose your stupidity like that? I guess stupidity and shamelessness in the exhibition of ignorance go hand in hand.

If 26 women or men accused you of drugging and raping them, would you hide?

 

[Lilah]

What does Bill Cosby have to do with this discussion?

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

Well, I feel I should interject here... we discuss rumors and accusations, all the time. We just usually do so because the intellectually less fortunate present them as fact.

I'm impressed that you stood up and confessed that you are among the intellectually less fortunate. Bravo!

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

26 accusations are still just accusations. Not proof. You don't get to cite Bill Cosby as an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. That doesn't fly here.

I hate bullies, so stop bullying me. As I've mentioned, if Cosby is an innocent little lamb, then he should stand before his accusers, look them in the eye, and call them liars. He can't do it because he's guilty.

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

I don't have to prove Cosby's sexual deviant behavior; the witnesses have done that, including the 90 year-old man. If a person is not guilty of what he is being accused, he should come forward and face his accusers.

Wrong again. People who are accused are not under obligation to answer their accusers. The burden of proof rests on the accusers alone. And you just idiotically claimed yet again that somebody's accusation was "proof". You just said it and I wanted to get it in quotes before you could edit your post. Aren't you embarrassed to expose your stupidity like that? I guess stupidity and shamelessness in the exhibition of ignorance go hand in hand.

If 26 women or men accused you of drugging and raping them, would you hide?

What you think an accused person should or shouldn't do is irrelevant. Even that you're too stupid to see for yourself.

 

[Lilah]

I hate bullies, so stop bullying me. As I've mentioned, if Cosby is an innocent little lamb, then he should stand before his accusers, look them in the eye, and call them liars. He can't do it because he's guilty.

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

I don't have to prove Cosby's sexual deviant behavior; the witnesses have done that, including the 90 year-old man. If a person is not guilty of what he is being accused, he should come forward and face his accusers.

Wrong again. People who are accused are not under obligation to answer their accusers. The burden of proof rests on the accusers alone. And you just idiotically claimed yet again that somebody's accusation was "proof". You just said it and I wanted to get it in quotes before you could edit your post. Aren't you embarrassed to expose your stupidity like that? I guess stupidity and shamelessness in the exhibition of ignorance go hand in hand.

If 26 women or men accused you of drugging and raping them, would you hide?

What you think an accused person should or shouldn't do is irrelevant. Even that you're too stupid to see for yourself.

Alan Dershowitz is a shinning example of what an accused person should do; he's fighting the rape charges filed against him. He's not hiding in the shadows or behind his lawyers. And what I think is very important to me. What a bully like you thinks of me is irrelevant.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

That's your opinion. You can't introduce your opinion as fact. If you can't cite proven sexual deviants, then you have nothing to offer this conversation.

I don't have to prove Cosby's sexual deviant behavior; the witnesses have done that, including the 90 year-old man. If a person is not guilty of what he is being accused, he should come forward and face his accusers.

Wrong again. People who are accused are not under obligation to answer their accusers. The burden of proof rests on the accusers alone. And you just idiotically claimed yet again that somebody's accusation was "proof". You just said it and I wanted to get it in quotes before you could edit your post. Aren't you embarrassed to expose your stupidity like that? I guess stupidity and shamelessness in the exhibition of ignorance go hand in hand.

If 26 women or men accused you of drugging and raping them, would you hide?

What you think an accused person should or shouldn't do is irrelevant. Even that you're too stupid to see for yourself.

Alan Dershowitz is a shinning example of what an accused person should do; he's fighting the rape charges filed against him. He's not hiding in the shadows or behind his lawyers. And what I think is very important to me. What a bully like you thinks of me is irrelevant.

What you think an accused person should or shouldn't do is irrelevant. Even that you're too stupid to see for yourself.

 

[Lilah]

I don't have to prove Cosby's sexual deviant behavior; the witnesses have done that, including the 90 year-old man. If a person is not guilty of what he is being accused, he should come forward and face his accusers.

Wrong again. People who are accused are not under obligation to answer their accusers. The burden of proof rests on the accusers alone. And you just idiotically claimed yet again that somebody's accusation was "proof". You just said it and I wanted to get it in quotes before you could edit your post. Aren't you embarrassed to expose your stupidity like that? I guess stupidity and shamelessness in the exhibition of ignorance go hand in hand.

If 26 women or men accused you of drugging and raping them, would you hide?

What you think an accused person should or shouldn't do is irrelevant. Even that you're too stupid to see for yourself.

Alan Dershowitz is a shinning example of what an accused person should do; he's fighting the rape charges filed against him. He's not hiding in the shadows or behind his lawyers. And what I think is very important to me. What a bully like you thinks of me is irrelevant.

What you think an accused person should or shouldn't do is irrelevant. Even that you're too stupid to see for yourself.

You're a bully who can only appeal to name calling rather than intellect.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

According to Tina Fey, he put de pills into de peoples, and de peoples didn't want them.

So you're grafting Bill Cosby into the conversation based on that? An accusation is a foregone conclusion for you? That's not even remotely a standard of proof needed for intelligent conversation. You just outed yourself as an idiot.

When twenty-six women come forward to tell their stories about an American icon without seeking monetary damages, I for one, believe them.. When a 90 year-old man, who worked for NBC during the Cosby Show as Cosby's facilities manager, says Cosby had everybody fooled because he was in charge of arranging payments to the women Cosby had affairs with, I believe him.
I'm including Cosby into the conversation because I believe him to be a sexual pervert; someone who has hurt many, many women.
Why doesn't Cosby face the accusers, look them in face, and deny the charges instead of hiding behind high-priced lawyers?

You believing them is not proof. Bill Cosby is not an example of sexual deviancy based on accusations. You really suck at intellectual conversation don't you? We discuss facts, not accusations and rumors. You're too stupid to see the futility in your strategy so I have to point it out to you.

Well, I feel I should interject here... we discuss rumors and accusations, all the time. We just usually do so because the intellectually less fortunate present them as fact.

I'm impressed that you stood up and confessed that you are among the intellectually less fortunate. Bravo!

Well... that's the best you could've done. And you should be comforted through the knowledge that no one here expects any more from ya.

Deflection: Yields to the standing point; default concession.

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Seawytch]

Do you enjoy being proven wrong? This was just recently....

When Justice Elena Kagan asked whether states could ban couples over the age of 55 because they wouldn't be able to have kids, Cooper argued that "it is very rare that…both parties to the couple are infertile." The chamber erupted in laughter. "No really, because…if both the woman and the man are over 55, there are not a lot of children coming out of that marriage," Kagan said, and the chamber filled with laughter again. Justice Stephen Breyer was more blunt: "I mean, there are lots of people who get married who can't have children."
​

At Supreme Court, Marriage Equality Foes' Best Argument Is That They're Losing

Now you're being desperate and in the process proving my point and cementing your reputation as a liar. When there is laughter, it's noteworthy and is recorded in print. No such record exists of the justices laughing while the Virginia attorney general was presenting oral arguments like you claimed. So you told a lie. Now you even admit it.

Wow- that is a stunning piece of misrepresentation- even by your own low standards

Here is what you claimed:
"Yes it is your problem because your claim is outlandish, and most likely a lie. Justices do not "laugh out loud" while attorneys general are presenting oral arguments.....

Stop lying, Fish breath!"

Then Seawitch provided proof that refuted your specific claim that Justices never laugh during oral arguments....and it happened again just a few days ago

Supreme Court justices laugh at Arizona town s church sign laws - Washington Times

I have no idea whether or not the Justices during Loving laughed out loud or not- and you didn't either- you just assumed that Justices never do that- and called Seawitch a liar- AND then said specifically that 'justices do not 'laugh out loud' while attorneys are presenting oral arguments.

In other words- you lied. Seawitch caught you in your lie. Maybe she did also- but most certainly you lied.

Oh and your claim about

That would dispense with any pretense of objectivity.

Here is a whole article about Supreme Court Justices cracking jokes in court.

Can you present a case where justices "laughed out loud" during the serious portions of proceedings such as when oral arguments are being presented?

No? Then STFU!

You made a claim, it was proven false. Move on.

No, you made a claim that was proven false. Now you're just being a child. Good bye child.

I didn't make a claim, Pee Wee, you did. You claimed that justices didn't laugh in chambers. I proved you wrong and then you tried to move the goalposts. So pathetic.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Now you're being desperate and in the process proving my point and cementing your reputation as a liar. When there is laughter, it's noteworthy and is recorded in print. No such record exists of the justices laughing while the Virginia attorney general was presenting oral arguments like you claimed. So you told a lie. Now you even admit it.

Wow- that is a stunning piece of misrepresentation- even by your own low standards

Here is what you claimed:
"Yes it is your problem because your claim is outlandish, and most likely a lie. Justices do not "laugh out loud" while attorneys general are presenting oral arguments.....

Stop lying, Fish breath!"

Then Seawitch provided proof that refuted your specific claim that Justices never laugh during oral arguments....and it happened again just a few days ago

Supreme Court justices laugh at Arizona town s church sign laws - Washington Times

I have no idea whether or not the Justices during Loving laughed out loud or not- and you didn't either- you just assumed that Justices never do that- and called Seawitch a liar- AND then said specifically that 'justices do not 'laugh out loud' while attorneys are presenting oral arguments.

In other words- you lied. Seawitch caught you in your lie. Maybe she did also- but most certainly you lied.

Oh and your claim about

That would dispense with any pretense of objectivity.

Here is a whole article about Supreme Court Justices cracking jokes in court.

Can you present a case where justices "laughed out loud" during the serious portions of proceedings such as when oral arguments are being presented?

No? Then STFU!

You made a claim, it was proven false. Move on.

No, you made a claim that was proven false. Now you're just being a child. Good bye child.

I didn't make a claim, Pee Wee, you did. You claimed that justices didn't laugh in chambers. I proved you wrong and then you tried to move the goalposts. So pathetic.

No, actually you claimed that they "laughed out loud" hearing oral arguments from the Virginia AG. Your claim, which was bullshit. Now we know you're a liar.