Acosta has pass revoked

[bripat9643]

I have already covered this. Always the technicality.."well see technically I never said that exact thing". But Im not claiming you did. You never say anything. You operate by rote. And you supported (((schiff))) when he said the Nunes Memo would (1) wreck national security and (2) cause a constitutional crisis. And you swore he was right.
I know you are dense but my point is you have so little humanity that you didnt even rebel after being humiliated by (((schiff))). You dont mind being treated like a serf because you were born to be one. And you spend your life "technically" wiggling out of taking any stand.

Fuax's favorite tactic is to pick out one single insignificant statement in your post and then harp on it relentlessly as if it's the crux of your entire position. He pretends he's disproved your entire argument if he manages to undermine that one irrelevant statement. Of course, his main claim has holes so big in it that you could drive a freight train through it.

Faux has been attempting to claim the D.C. law doesn't allow you to use force to keep someone from taking your property. His entire argument hinges on whether I quote the actual statute that says so.

Faun is just a liberal. Not real bright or deep. Their arguments range from "you misspelled that" to "technically I only said maybe" to "prove that females dont have penises". No sense using human reasoning on them. The "out" is all important to them. It comes from their puritan heritage...the ability to use legalisms to avoid truth.
But remember..their goal is not really to win anything. You have to understand and internalize this if nothing else. In life, in politics, and especially in their chat life their goal is grind things to a standoff. Nothing more. Think of the Kavanaugh hearings...nothing to be proved only endless stasis and sand in the gears.

You know that Democrats fear the truth which is why Wikileaks and project veritas were so damaging to them.The tangled lies here are used NOT to win an argument. I have to keep emphasizing that. They are to hide any resolution to a question. Its why so many arguments with them devolve into Bill Clintons "depends on what the defintion of is is." He wont argue about lying under oath..he simply lied and then went after the utility of the English Language. He didnt really want to convince you of anything. He smirked because he probably wanted you to know how he treated young women. But his goal was to make it impossible for you to use words to prove anything about him. Its that simple.
For them words are tools to obfuscate rather than communicate.

Try Vox Day's "SJWs Always Lie". Every antic you see here is listed in his book. Hes been banned from Twitter and Reddit but his book is still available on Amazon for now. The book is only like 4.99. Its not just for the dark places liberals slither around like chat rooms but he gives examples of how to avoid their attacks in the workplace.
Also try Ron Jonsons book. Its more expensive and was a best seller. He gives illustrative examples of the times Marxists have gone after peoples jobs and been beaten completely into the dirt. He describes the dangers of grappling with their lies and half truths as well.

You simply cant win when you approach someone as a decent person and treat them as if they are arguing in good faith...when in reality you are dealing with a soulless liberal. Point out thir lies and help decent people recognize them. its all you can do.
Would you ever expect resolution from people with a relative value system and no firm morals except hatred for anyone with morals?

LOLOL

What a diatribe just to say it shouldn’t matter if you falsely ascribe to me positions I didn’t take. All that matters is the bullshit you spew.

But it's OK if you falsely ascribe to me positions I didn't take, eh, douchebag?

oh? What position have I falsely attributed to you?

"The claim the fucking moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary."

 

[koshergrl]

Acosta is now claiming that he was banned for "hard questions". Could anyone tell me where the question mark goes in the following “question”?

"As you know, Mr. President, the caravan was not an invasion. It’s a group of migrants moving up from Central America towards the border with the U.S.”

Accusations/arguments is all the fake press engages in. That and hiding information, colluding with our enemies, and presenting a totally false narrative for the purpose of overthrowing our government.

CNN replay on facebook is nothing but a steady stream of anti American propaganda.

 

[bripat9643]

CNN's access should be removed as well. They permitted that Acosta to engage in his rude behavior. In fact, they even endorsed it. They should be required to submit a formal apology and implement policies to require respectful behavior towards the president from their reporters.

I don't think that's really necessary. I'd just stick with the moderate move for now, you wouldnt want to send the wrong message. Acosta shouldnt have pushed her arm down. That's on him. I wonder if he has made an apology yet to the intern?

He shouldn't have harangued the President with his moronic opinions. He should have turned over the mic the second it was requested. He deserves to be barred permanently, and CNN deserves to be barred until it makes amends.

He did turn over the mic when it was requested. Trump said, “put the mic down,” and Acosta handed the mic to that woman.

Wrong. It was requested when the intern extended her hand for it. Trump said “put the mic down” because the asshole refused to turn it over.

Nope, that’s not a request. Her job is to take the mic when it’s handed to her and then pass it to someone else. The first time Acosta was asked to give up the mic was when trump asked him to put the mic down. At that time, he handed her the mic.

Yes, extending her hand is a request. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that it's a request. Apparently you believe that Trump himself explicitly requests that each reporter returns the mic when they are done. What have you ever seen that?

Face it: your a lying idiot. You know you are wrong, but you will never admit it, if your past behavior is any guide.

 

[Faun]

I have already covered this. Always the technicality.."well see technically I never said that exact thing". But Im not claiming you did. You never say anything. You operate by rote. And you supported (((schiff))) when he said the Nunes Memo would (1) wreck national security and (2) cause a constitutional crisis. And you swore he was right.
I know you are dense but my point is you have so little humanity that you didnt even rebel after being humiliated by (((schiff))). You dont mind being treated like a serf because you were born to be one. And you spend your life "technically" wiggling out of taking any stand.

Fuax's favorite tactic is to pick out one single insignificant statement in your post and then harp on it relentlessly as if it's the crux of your entire position. He pretends he's disproved your entire argument if he manages to undermine that one irrelevant statement. Of course, his main claim has holes so big in it that you could drive a freight train through it.

Faux has been attempting to claim the D.C. law doesn't allow you to use force to keep someone from taking your property. His entire argument hinges on whether I quote the actual statute that says so.

Faun is just a liberal. Not real bright or deep. Their arguments range from "you misspelled that" to "technically I only said maybe" to "prove that females dont have penises". No sense using human reasoning on them. The "out" is all important to them. It comes from their puritan heritage...the ability to use legalisms to avoid truth.
But remember..their goal is not really to win anything. You have to understand and internalize this if nothing else. In life, in politics, and especially in their chat life their goal is grind things to a standoff. Nothing more. Think of the Kavanaugh hearings...nothing to be proved only endless stasis and sand in the gears.

You know that Democrats fear the truth which is why Wikileaks and project veritas were so damaging to them.The tangled lies here are used NOT to win an argument. I have to keep emphasizing that. They are to hide any resolution to a question. Its why so many arguments with them devolve into Bill Clintons "depends on what the defintion of is is." He wont argue about lying under oath..he simply lied and then went after the utility of the English Language. He didnt really want to convince you of anything. He smirked because he probably wanted you to know how he treated young women. But his goal was to make it impossible for you to use words to prove anything about him. Its that simple.
For them words are tools to obfuscate rather than communicate.

Try Vox Day's "SJWs Always Lie". Every antic you see here is listed in his book. Hes been banned from Twitter and Reddit but his book is still available on Amazon for now. The book is only like 4.99. Its not just for the dark places liberals slither around like chat rooms but he gives examples of how to avoid their attacks in the workplace.
Also try Ron Jonsons book. Its more expensive and was a best seller. He gives illustrative examples of the times Marxists have gone after peoples jobs and been beaten completely into the dirt. He describes the dangers of grappling with their lies and half truths as well.

You simply cant win when you approach someone as a decent person and treat them as if they are arguing in good faith...when in reality you are dealing with a soulless liberal. Point out thir lies and help decent people recognize them. its all you can do.
Would you ever expect resolution from people with a relative value system and no firm morals except hatred for anyone with morals?

”Beating them to within an inch of their lives, obviously isn't necessary”

Yet that was the example you ridiculously offered.

Even funnier is you opining you don’t have to prove everything you say. Of course. We should just take everything a fucking moron like you says as gospel.

My example proves that using force to protect your property is not against the law.

Right, so I have to prove the sky is blue and water is wet?

You're an idiot.

No, you have to post the D.C. law that supports your claim.

You couldn’t.

You lose because you’re a loser.

Sorry, turd, it's purely your fetish that I have to wade my way through that labyrinthine mess. Anyone without an extra hole in his head knows you can use force to protect your property. I never heard of a state where that wasn't allowed, and neither have you.

You haven’t proven a theft occurred, you haven’t proven DC has the same law as Wisconsin, you haven’t proven anything except for the fact that you’re a fake cling moron. That you expect anyone to take you at your word when a) you can’t prove s word you’re saying; and b) you’re a fucking moron, is quite humorous though, I’ll grant you that.

I also haven't proven that the sky is blue or that water is wet. That's the nature of what you are demanding me to prove. If you want to insist that DC law doesn't allow people to defend their property, then prove it.

Fucking moron, now you’re stupidly arguing a fallacy that if you state a given fact, like the sky is blue, then any other nonsense you say should equally be accepted as fact.

 

[Faun]

Fuax's favorite tactic is to pick out one single insignificant statement in your post and then harp on it relentlessly as if it's the crux of your entire position. He pretends he's disproved your entire argument if he manages to undermine that one irrelevant statement. Of course, his main claim has holes so big in it that you could drive a freight train through it.

Faux has been attempting to claim the D.C. law doesn't allow you to use force to keep someone from taking your property. His entire argument hinges on whether I quote the actual statute that says so.

Faun is just a liberal. Not real bright or deep. Their arguments range from "you misspelled that" to "technically I only said maybe" to "prove that females dont have penises". No sense using human reasoning on them. The "out" is all important to them. It comes from their puritan heritage...the ability to use legalisms to avoid truth.
But remember..their goal is not really to win anything. You have to understand and internalize this if nothing else. In life, in politics, and especially in their chat life their goal is grind things to a standoff. Nothing more. Think of the Kavanaugh hearings...nothing to be proved only endless stasis and sand in the gears.

You know that Democrats fear the truth which is why Wikileaks and project veritas were so damaging to them.The tangled lies here are used NOT to win an argument. I have to keep emphasizing that. They are to hide any resolution to a question. Its why so many arguments with them devolve into Bill Clintons "depends on what the defintion of is is." He wont argue about lying under oath..he simply lied and then went after the utility of the English Language. He didnt really want to convince you of anything. He smirked because he probably wanted you to know how he treated young women. But his goal was to make it impossible for you to use words to prove anything about him. Its that simple.
For them words are tools to obfuscate rather than communicate.

Try Vox Day's "SJWs Always Lie". Every antic you see here is listed in his book. Hes been banned from Twitter and Reddit but his book is still available on Amazon for now. The book is only like 4.99. Its not just for the dark places liberals slither around like chat rooms but he gives examples of how to avoid their attacks in the workplace.
Also try Ron Jonsons book. Its more expensive and was a best seller. He gives illustrative examples of the times Marxists have gone after peoples jobs and been beaten completely into the dirt. He describes the dangers of grappling with their lies and half truths as well.

You simply cant win when you approach someone as a decent person and treat them as if they are arguing in good faith...when in reality you are dealing with a soulless liberal. Point out thir lies and help decent people recognize them. its all you can do.
Would you ever expect resolution from people with a relative value system and no firm morals except hatred for anyone with morals?

LOLOL

What a diatribe just to say it shouldn’t matter if you falsely ascribe to me positions I didn’t take. All that matters is the bullshit you spew.

But it's OK if you falsely ascribe to me positions I didn't take, eh, douchebag?

oh? What position have I falsely attributed to you?

"The claim the fucking moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary."

And I quoted you saying that...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

 

[Faun]

I don't think that's really necessary. I'd just stick with the moderate move for now, you wouldnt want to send the wrong message. Acosta shouldnt have pushed her arm down. That's on him. I wonder if he has made an apology yet to the intern?

He shouldn't have harangued the President with his moronic opinions. He should have turned over the mic the second it was requested. He deserves to be barred permanently, and CNN deserves to be barred until it makes amends.

He did turn over the mic when it was requested. Trump said, “put the mic down,” and Acosta handed the mic to that woman.

Wrong. It was requested when the intern extended her hand for it. Trump said “put the mic down” because the asshole refused to turn it over.

Nope, that’s not a request. Her job is to take the mic when it’s handed to her and then pass it to someone else. The first time Acosta was asked to give up the mic was when trump asked him to put the mic down. At that time, he handed her the mic.

Yes, extending her hand is a request. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that it's a request. Apparently you believe that Trump himself explicitly requests that each reporter returns the mic when they are done. What have you ever seen that?

Face it: your a lying idiot. You know you are wrong, but you will never admit it, if your past behavior is any guide.

Nope, she doesn’t decide when a reporter is done.

 

[Faun]

your a lying idiot.

 

[bripat9643]

Fuax's favorite tactic is to pick out one single insignificant statement in your post and then harp on it relentlessly as if it's the crux of your entire position. He pretends he's disproved your entire argument if he manages to undermine that one irrelevant statement. Of course, his main claim has holes so big in it that you could drive a freight train through it.

Faux has been attempting to claim the D.C. law doesn't allow you to use force to keep someone from taking your property. His entire argument hinges on whether I quote the actual statute that says so.

Faun is just a liberal. Not real bright or deep. Their arguments range from "you misspelled that" to "technically I only said maybe" to "prove that females dont have penises". No sense using human reasoning on them. The "out" is all important to them. It comes from their puritan heritage...the ability to use legalisms to avoid truth.
But remember..their goal is not really to win anything. You have to understand and internalize this if nothing else. In life, in politics, and especially in their chat life their goal is grind things to a standoff. Nothing more. Think of the Kavanaugh hearings...nothing to be proved only endless stasis and sand in the gears.

You know that Democrats fear the truth which is why Wikileaks and project veritas were so damaging to them.The tangled lies here are used NOT to win an argument. I have to keep emphasizing that. They are to hide any resolution to a question. Its why so many arguments with them devolve into Bill Clintons "depends on what the defintion of is is." He wont argue about lying under oath..he simply lied and then went after the utility of the English Language. He didnt really want to convince you of anything. He smirked because he probably wanted you to know how he treated young women. But his goal was to make it impossible for you to use words to prove anything about him. Its that simple.
For them words are tools to obfuscate rather than communicate.

Try Vox Day's "SJWs Always Lie". Every antic you see here is listed in his book. Hes been banned from Twitter and Reddit but his book is still available on Amazon for now. The book is only like 4.99. Its not just for the dark places liberals slither around like chat rooms but he gives examples of how to avoid their attacks in the workplace.
Also try Ron Jonsons book. Its more expensive and was a best seller. He gives illustrative examples of the times Marxists have gone after peoples jobs and been beaten completely into the dirt. He describes the dangers of grappling with their lies and half truths as well.

You simply cant win when you approach someone as a decent person and treat them as if they are arguing in good faith...when in reality you are dealing with a soulless liberal. Point out thir lies and help decent people recognize them. its all you can do.
Would you ever expect resolution from people with a relative value system and no firm morals except hatred for anyone with morals?

My example proves that using force to protect your property is not against the law.

Right, so I have to prove the sky is blue and water is wet?

You're an idiot.

No, you have to post the D.C. law that supports your claim.

You couldn’t.

You lose because you’re a loser.

Sorry, turd, it's purely your fetish that I have to wade my way through that labyrinthine mess. Anyone without an extra hole in his head knows you can use force to protect your property. I never heard of a state where that wasn't allowed, and neither have you.

You haven’t proven a theft occurred, you haven’t proven DC has the same law as Wisconsin, you haven’t proven anything except for the fact that you’re a fake cling moron. That you expect anyone to take you at your word when a) you can’t prove s word you’re saying; and b) you’re a fucking moron, is quite humorous though, I’ll grant you that.

I also haven't proven that the sky is blue or that water is wet. That's the nature of what you are demanding me to prove. If you want to insist that DC law doesn't allow people to defend their property, then prove it.

Fucking moron, now you’re stupidly arguing a fallacy that if you state a given fact, like the sky is blue, then any other nonsense you say should equally be accepted as fact.

The legality of using force to defend your property is such a fact. The claim that the intern didn't request the return of the Whitehouse owned microphone is the ultimate Faux gaslighting idiocy.

 

[bripat9643]

Faun is just a liberal. Not real bright or deep. Their arguments range from "you misspelled that" to "technically I only said maybe" to "prove that females dont have penises". No sense using human reasoning on them. The "out" is all important to them. It comes from their puritan heritage...the ability to use legalisms to avoid truth.
But remember..their goal is not really to win anything. You have to understand and internalize this if nothing else. In life, in politics, and especially in their chat life their goal is grind things to a standoff. Nothing more. Think of the Kavanaugh hearings...nothing to be proved only endless stasis and sand in the gears.

You know that Democrats fear the truth which is why Wikileaks and project veritas were so damaging to them.The tangled lies here are used NOT to win an argument. I have to keep emphasizing that. They are to hide any resolution to a question. Its why so many arguments with them devolve into Bill Clintons "depends on what the defintion of is is." He wont argue about lying under oath..he simply lied and then went after the utility of the English Language. He didnt really want to convince you of anything. He smirked because he probably wanted you to know how he treated young women. But his goal was to make it impossible for you to use words to prove anything about him. Its that simple.
For them words are tools to obfuscate rather than communicate.

Try Vox Day's "SJWs Always Lie". Every antic you see here is listed in his book. Hes been banned from Twitter and Reddit but his book is still available on Amazon for now. The book is only like 4.99. Its not just for the dark places liberals slither around like chat rooms but he gives examples of how to avoid their attacks in the workplace.
Also try Ron Jonsons book. Its more expensive and was a best seller. He gives illustrative examples of the times Marxists have gone after peoples jobs and been beaten completely into the dirt. He describes the dangers of grappling with their lies and half truths as well.

You simply cant win when you approach someone as a decent person and treat them as if they are arguing in good faith...when in reality you are dealing with a soulless liberal. Point out thir lies and help decent people recognize them. its all you can do.
Would you ever expect resolution from people with a relative value system and no firm morals except hatred for anyone with morals?

LOLOL

What a diatribe just to say it shouldn’t matter if you falsely ascribe to me positions I didn’t take. All that matters is the bullshit you spew.

But it's OK if you falsely ascribe to me positions I didn't take, eh, douchebag?

oh? What position have I falsely attributed to you?

"The claim the fucking moron made was that the intern had the legal right to physically wrestle that mic from him using any means necessary."

And I quoted you saying that...

She sure as hell is. She's entitled to use whatever physical force is required to retrieve White house property from someone who at this point is properly deemed a thief.

You repeat the idiotic lie again!

 

[bripat9643]

He shouldn't have harangued the President with his moronic opinions. He should have turned over the mic the second it was requested. He deserves to be barred permanently, and CNN deserves to be barred until it makes amends.

He did turn over the mic when it was requested. Trump said, “put the mic down,” and Acosta handed the mic to that woman.

Wrong. It was requested when the intern extended her hand for it. Trump said “put the mic down” because the asshole refused to turn it over.

Nope, that’s not a request. Her job is to take the mic when it’s handed to her and then pass it to someone else. The first time Acosta was asked to give up the mic was when trump asked him to put the mic down. At that time, he handed her the mic.

Yes, extending her hand is a request. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that it's a request. Apparently you believe that Trump himself explicitly requests that each reporter returns the mic when they are done. What have you ever seen that?

Face it: your a lying idiot. You know you are wrong, but you will never admit it, if your past behavior is any guide.

Nope, she doesn’t decide when a reporter is done.

That isn't what I said, moron. Trump signals her to pass the mic on to the next reporter. Trump signaled to her and Acosta that his turn was over. There is simply no doubt that the Whitehouse wanted Acosta to hand over the mic, and that he refused.

 

[DOTR]

The legality of using force to defend your property is such a fact. The claim that the intern didn't request the return of the Whitehouse owned microphone is the ultimate Faux gaslighting idiocy.

Yes it is.

But in the ideal world of the liberal there is no way to communicate that its time to pass the mic. And there is no way to describe the act of abusing the intern who asked for the mic. It is literally as impossible as describing the differences between male and female for them.

"The purpose of Newspeak...to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted...a heretical thought ...should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words...Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought."
G Orwell

There is a reason Marxists prefer that we dont read Bradbury and Orwell and Milton and Carlyle and Chesterson and so on. They teach us how to think as free men rather than puritan legalists.

And I remind you in reading Faun to notice he makes no political claims. Here are his claims and they are the only claims that matter to him...

You haven’t proven... you haven’t proven anything ... a) you can’t prove s word you’re saying

No, you have to post the D.C. law that supports your claim.
.

Quote me saying...Quote me saying it ...

You can’t...

If you cant catch him he doesn't have to defend anything. It is sufficient to stop anyone else from functioning.

 

[DOTR]

Acosta is now claiming that he was banned for "hard questions". Could anyone tell me where the question mark goes in the following “question”?

"As you know, Mr. President, the caravan was not an invasion. It’s a group of migrants moving up from Central America towards the border with the U.S.”

Accusations/arguments is all the fake press engages in. That and hiding information, colluding with our enemies, and presenting a totally false narrative for the purpose of overthrowing our government.

CNN replay on facebook is nothing but a steady stream of anti American propaganda.

CNN is an enemy of America. We did know the ruling class would never go easy though koshergirl. Simply winning elections wont do it because these people rule by a monopoly on power and money and were never elected to anything in the first place. They have appointed themselves to power. So the nastiness is to be expected.
Trump is doing the right thing by his continuous hammering of their privilege and exposing their desperation. He just needs to keep it up.
And if you think we arent winning KG just remember this...two years ago could you have imagined seeing the press no longer deny being an arm of the liberal elites? We have already won there.
Its finally obvious that it is America and her President against the globalist ruling elites.

 

[DOTR]

You remain an idiot. Schiff is incapable of humiliating you since he doesn’t represent me. Are you humiliated by any shit move made by representatives from other states?

(((schiff))) never humiliated me. Ill agree thats impossible. I always knew he was a liar. He humiliated you. And no he doesn't represent you. He probably despises you...most people despise lickspittles. You carried water for him. Not vice versa.
I tend to make honest choices so no im not humiliated by any representatives. I avoid it by not siding with corrupt officials hiding documents with lies. That way I dont have to worry about being exposed.
You will note that national security is intact (except for the southern border) and that no constitutional crisis occurred? Of course you have. You just dont have the integrity to admit it.
Come on lets see you weasel around...tell us how national security *may* be compromised. Thats the way a weasel avoids admitting he was wrong...by claiming its impossible to tell if he was wrong!
But deep down...you feel little over it.

 

[protectionist]

He didn't shove her arm down, stop spinning the INFO Wars video. I guess you haven't seen the 3 black woman that Trump insulted this week, but I am pretty sure you will spin it that you didn't see anything wrong with his words.

1. He WAS done. Trump said so.

2. He shoved her arm down, YOU stop spinning.

 

[protectionist]

Nope, that’s not a request. Her job is to take the mic when it’s handed to her and then pass it to someone else. The first time Acosta was asked to give up the mic was when trump asked him to put the mic down. At that time, he handed her the mic.

We saw what happened. Your BS is a joke.

 

[protectionist]

You haven’t proven a theft occurred, you haven’t proven DC has the same law as Wisconsin, you haven’t proven anything except for the fact that you’re a fake cling moron. That you expect anyone to take you at your word when a) you can’t prove s word you’re saying; and b) you’re a fucking moron, is quite humorous though, I’ll grant you that.

He's right. You're wrong (and stupid) Please shut up.

 

[skye]

fuck him

 

[Faun]

Faun is just a liberal. Not real bright or deep. Their arguments range from "you misspelled that" to "technically I only said maybe" to "prove that females dont have penises". No sense using human reasoning on them. The "out" is all important to them. It comes from their puritan heritage...the ability to use legalisms to avoid truth.
But remember..their goal is not really to win anything. You have to understand and internalize this if nothing else. In life, in politics, and especially in their chat life their goal is grind things to a standoff. Nothing more. Think of the Kavanaugh hearings...nothing to be proved only endless stasis and sand in the gears.

You know that Democrats fear the truth which is why Wikileaks and project veritas were so damaging to them.The tangled lies here are used NOT to win an argument. I have to keep emphasizing that. They are to hide any resolution to a question. Its why so many arguments with them devolve into Bill Clintons "depends on what the defintion of is is." He wont argue about lying under oath..he simply lied and then went after the utility of the English Language. He didnt really want to convince you of anything. He smirked because he probably wanted you to know how he treated young women. But his goal was to make it impossible for you to use words to prove anything about him. Its that simple.
For them words are tools to obfuscate rather than communicate.

Try Vox Day's "SJWs Always Lie". Every antic you see here is listed in his book. Hes been banned from Twitter and Reddit but his book is still available on Amazon for now. The book is only like 4.99. Its not just for the dark places liberals slither around like chat rooms but he gives examples of how to avoid their attacks in the workplace.
Also try Ron Jonsons book. Its more expensive and was a best seller. He gives illustrative examples of the times Marxists have gone after peoples jobs and been beaten completely into the dirt. He describes the dangers of grappling with their lies and half truths as well.

You simply cant win when you approach someone as a decent person and treat them as if they are arguing in good faith...when in reality you are dealing with a soulless liberal. Point out thir lies and help decent people recognize them. its all you can do.
Would you ever expect resolution from people with a relative value system and no firm morals except hatred for anyone with morals?

No, you have to post the D.C. law that supports your claim.

You couldn’t.

You lose because you’re a loser.

Sorry, turd, it's purely your fetish that I have to wade my way through that labyrinthine mess. Anyone without an extra hole in his head knows you can use force to protect your property. I never heard of a state where that wasn't allowed, and neither have you.

You haven’t proven a theft occurred, you haven’t proven DC has the same law as Wisconsin, you haven’t proven anything except for the fact that you’re a fake cling moron. That you expect anyone to take you at your word when a) you can’t prove s word you’re saying; and b) you’re a fucking moron, is quite humorous though, I’ll grant you that.

I also haven't proven that the sky is blue or that water is wet. That's the nature of what you are demanding me to prove. If you want to insist that DC law doesn't allow people to defend their property, then prove it.

Fucking moron, now you’re stupidly arguing a fallacy that if you state a given fact, like the sky is blue, then any other nonsense you say should equally be accepted as fact.

The legality of using force to defend your property is such a fact. The claim that the intern didn't request the return of the Whitehouse owned microphone is the ultimate Faux gaslighting idiocy.

And yet, she was not in any position to make any request. She is not there to set the agenda for who speaks or for when they speak.

 

[Oddball]

 

[Faun]

He did turn over the mic when it was requested. Trump said, “put the mic down,” and Acosta handed the mic to that woman.

Wrong. It was requested when the intern extended her hand for it. Trump said “put the mic down” because the asshole refused to turn it over.

Nope, that’s not a request. Her job is to take the mic when it’s handed to her and then pass it to someone else. The first time Acosta was asked to give up the mic was when trump asked him to put the mic down. At that time, he handed her the mic.

Yes, extending her hand is a request. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that it's a request. Apparently you believe that Trump himself explicitly requests that each reporter returns the mic when they are done. What have you ever seen that?

Face it: your a lying idiot. You know you are wrong, but you will never admit it, if your past behavior is any guide.

Nope, she doesn’t decide when a reporter is done.

That isn't what I said, moron. Trump signals her to pass the mic on to the next reporter. Trump signaled to her and Acosta that his turn was over. There is simply no doubt that the Whitehouse wanted Acosta to hand over the mic, and that he refused.

All trump said was, “that’s enough,” but continued engaging with Acosta. It wasn’t until Trump said, “put down the mic,” that he made any indication that Acosta give up the mic. Even worse for you, trump made the same gestures of pointing to other journalists to speak while the next reporter after Acosta spoke — and that woman didn’t try to rip the mic from his clutch.