El Paso Democrats Tell OUR PRESIDENT TO STAY AWAY!

[martybegan]

He was under the assumption that the rally also included people just there for the statue protest.

He excluded the racists from his statement.

So what happened to your accusation of me lying? Can't admit I proved you were wrong?

The fact you can't give this up in the face of overwhelming evidence just shows how much of a useless hack you are.

Bullshit, he wasn't under any assumptions. HD even said he waited days to clarify his earlier statements until he could gather all the facts.

"So what happened to your accusation of me lying? Can't admit I proved you were wrong?"

LOLOL

What an idiot you are, huh? Desperate for significance too. You said he excluded them in his original statement. That's a lie, he didn't. You then posted portions from a transcript from 2 days later where he did while in full damage control after equating the racists on the right with antifa and other protesters on the left. You lied, own it.

I listed the speech with the "fine people" line. Are you telling me he said "fine people" before that?

I'm telling you you lied when you said he excluded them in his original statement.

The interview is the origin of your accusation about him calling WP types "fine people"

He excluded them in the very same interview.

You are harping on the fine people thing, i am talking about the fine people thing.

That was days later after the media blew up in his face over his actual original statement. The comments you're referring to came two days later and were damage control because his initial statement didn't call any of them out. All he said then was that there were bad people on many sides.

And he didn't name all of the racist groups in that press conference you're referring to. He called out neonazis an white supremacists. So does this mean the very fine people he was talking about were kkk and white nationalists?

But you harp on the "fine people" line, and he excluded WP types from that category. That is the statement everyone on your side brings up over and over, and in that statement he condemned WP types. But you still go with semantics to try to salvage your lies about the statement and his intent.

Only your types split the needle to try to cover up for your exaggerations and outright lies.

 

[Faun]

Bullshit, he wasn't under any assumptions. HD even said he waited days to clarify his earlier statements until he could gather all the facts.

"So what happened to your accusation of me lying? Can't admit I proved you were wrong?"

LOLOL

What an idiot you are, huh? Desperate for significance too. You said he excluded them in his original statement. That's a lie, he didn't. You then posted portions from a transcript from 2 days later where he did while in full damage control after equating the racists on the right with antifa and other protesters on the left. You lied, own it.

I listed the speech with the "fine people" line. Are you telling me he said "fine people" before that?

I'm telling you you lied when you said he excluded them in his original statement.

The interview is the origin of your accusation about him calling WP types "fine people"

He excluded them in the very same interview.

You are harping on the fine people thing, i am talking about the fine people thing.

That was days later after the media blew up in his face over his actual original statement. The comments you're referring to came two days later and were damage control because his initial statement didn't call any of them out. All he said then was that there were bad people on many sides.

And he didn't name all of the racist groups in that press conference you're referring to. He called out neonazis an white supremacists. So does this mean the very fine people he was talking about were kkk and white nationalists?

But you harp on the "fine people" line, and he excluded WP types from that category. That is the statement everyone on your side brings up over and over, and in that statement he condemned WP types. But you still go with semantics to try to salvage your lies about the statement and his intent.

Only your types split the needle to try to cover up for your exaggerations and outright lies.

You poor thing, you're coming unglued. You lied when you falsely claimed he called them out in his original statement and you're ignoring the reality that it was a racist rally, organized by two racists trying to unite the alt-right. So which of them are very fine people?

 

[martybegan]

I listed the speech with the "fine people" line. Are you telling me he said "fine people" before that?

I'm telling you you lied when you said he excluded them in his original statement.

The interview is the origin of your accusation about him calling WP types "fine people"

He excluded them in the very same interview.

You are harping on the fine people thing, i am talking about the fine people thing.

That was days later after the media blew up in his face over his actual original statement. The comments you're referring to came two days later and were damage control because his initial statement didn't call any of them out. All he said then was that there were bad people on many sides.

And he didn't name all of the racist groups in that press conference you're referring to. He called out neonazis an white supremacists. So does this mean the very fine people he was talking about were kkk and white nationalists?

But you harp on the "fine people" line, and he excluded WP types from that category. That is the statement everyone on your side brings up over and over, and in that statement he condemned WP types. But you still go with semantics to try to salvage your lies about the statement and his intent.

Only your types split the needle to try to cover up for your exaggerations and outright lies.

You poor thing, you're coming unglued. You lied when you falsely claimed he called them out in his original statement and you're ignoring the reality that it was a racist rally, organized by two racists trying to unite the alt-right. So which of them are very fine people?

By original statement I meant the fine people statement. That is the one everyone focuses on, it's the one fact checked, and its the one where he excludes WP types from his description.

 

[Faun]

I'm telling you you lied when you said he excluded them in his original statement.

The interview is the origin of your accusation about him calling WP types "fine people"

He excluded them in the very same interview.

You are harping on the fine people thing, i am talking about the fine people thing.

That was days later after the media blew up in his face over his actual original statement. The comments you're referring to came two days later and were damage control because his initial statement didn't call any of them out. All he said then was that there were bad people on many sides.

And he didn't name all of the racist groups in that press conference you're referring to. He called out neonazis an white supremacists. So does this mean the very fine people he was talking about were kkk and white nationalists?

But you harp on the "fine people" line, and he excluded WP types from that category. That is the statement everyone on your side brings up over and over, and in that statement he condemned WP types. But you still go with semantics to try to salvage your lies about the statement and his intent.

Only your types split the needle to try to cover up for your exaggerations and outright lies.

You poor thing, you're coming unglued. You lied when you falsely claimed he called them out in his original statement and you're ignoring the reality that it was a racist rally, organized by two racists trying to unite the alt-right. So which of them are very fine people?

By original statement I meant the fine people statement. That is the one everyone focuses on, it's the one fact checked, and its the one where he excludes WP types from his description.

All of his statements were scrutinized. His original one for not calling out specific racists and the one you're referencing because he equated the two sides and called some on the right, "very fine people," when the only ones on the right were racists. Again, it was a racist rally designed to unite alt-right groups like neonazis, kkk, white nationalists and white supremacists.

And according to that asshole, some of them are very fine people.

 

[martybegan]

The interview is the origin of your accusation about him calling WP types "fine people"

He excluded them in the very same interview.

You are harping on the fine people thing, i am talking about the fine people thing.

That was days later after the media blew up in his face over his actual original statement. The comments you're referring to came two days later and were damage control because his initial statement didn't call any of them out. All he said then was that there were bad people on many sides.

And he didn't name all of the racist groups in that press conference you're referring to. He called out neonazis an white supremacists. So does this mean the very fine people he was talking about were kkk and white nationalists?

But you harp on the "fine people" line, and he excluded WP types from that category. That is the statement everyone on your side brings up over and over, and in that statement he condemned WP types. But you still go with semantics to try to salvage your lies about the statement and his intent.

Only your types split the needle to try to cover up for your exaggerations and outright lies.

You poor thing, you're coming unglued. You lied when you falsely claimed he called them out in his original statement and you're ignoring the reality that it was a racist rally, organized by two racists trying to unite the alt-right. So which of them are very fine people?

By original statement I meant the fine people statement. That is the one everyone focuses on, it's the one fact checked, and its the one where he excludes WP types from his description.

All of his statements were scrutinized. His original one for not calling out specific racists and the one you're referencing because he equated the two sides and called some on the right, "very fine people," when the only ones on the right were racists. Again, it was a racist rally designed to unite alt-right groups like neonazis, kkk, white nationalists and white supremacists.

And according to that asshole, some of them are very fine people.

It was thought at the time that others were at the rally as well. Considering your side equates anyone to the Right of Mitt Romney as a racist, it's easy to see how there was confusion.

Yet you can't deny he excluded WP types from his "fine people" statement, even if you decide to go with semantics to try and deny it.