Another Bernie Sanders field organizer wants to murder Repubicans and open gulags...

[Pogo]

Meanwhile, if you think you can actually construct an Ass-ociation Fallacy out of this, by all means show us evidence, even if it's an illegal video, of Bernie Sanders instructing his people to use violence in any way. I'll be here waiting.

Need some help with that?

Look for some key phrases like "beat the crap out of 'im willya?" and "knock the hell" and "I'd like to punch him right in the face" and "if you hurt him I'll pay your legal bills" Let us know what you find.

 

[MisterBeale]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

I think what is bugggin him is that video O'Keef got that had the CEO of CNN admitting that his number one goal is to "GET TRUMP"

 

[Pogo]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

 

[MisterBeale]

 

[Pogo]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

I think what is bugggin him is that video O'Keef got that had the CEO of CNN admitting that his number one goal is to "GET TRUMP"

I don't even know about that one.

If anyone has a link though, I'm pretty good at finding edits.

 

[MisterBeale]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

BULLSHIT.

I'm the one that pointed it out before you did!

 

[martybegan]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

In that thread the guy making the claim against the professor is the source.

Screeeeeeecccchhhh

 

[Pogo]

James O'Keefe Releases Latest Video
Disguised as Mary Landrieu, O'Queef got an exclusive interview with the POTUS. Totally not at all edited.

​

 

[Pogo]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

BULLSHIT.

I'm the one that pointed it out before you did!

You got here first because I was bizzy whupping Marty's ass. That takes time yanno.

 

[Pogo]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

In that thread the guy making the claim against the professor is the source.

Screeeeeeecccchhhh

Nnnnnnape. He's the actor. A source is a third person. You can't be both.

 

[martybegan]

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

BULLSHIT.

I'm the one that pointed it out before you did!

You got here first because I was bizzy whupping Marty's ass. That takes time yanno.

Wow, talk about delusional.

Go back to your hole.

 

[Pogo]

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

BULLSHIT.

I'm the one that pointed it out before you did!

You got here first because I was bizzy whupping Marty's ass. That takes time yanno.

Wow, talk about delusional.

Go back to your hole.

Okay, you're right. I admit, it took no time at all.

 

[martybegan]

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

In that thread the guy making the claim against the professor is the source.

Screeeeeeecccchhhh

Nnnnnnape. He's the actor. A source is a third person. You can't be both.

What is the definition of primary and secondary source?

• A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed; a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document created by such a person. A secondary source is one that gives information about a primary source.

He is a primary source because he has direct knowledge of what happened because he was there. Being a source and an actor are not exclusive of each other.

 

[martybegan]

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

BULLSHIT.

I'm the one that pointed it out before you did!

You got here first because I was bizzy whupping Marty's ass. That takes time yanno.

Wow, talk about delusional.

Go back to your hole.

Okay, you're right. I admit, it took no time at all.

There you go, coming out of your hole again.

 

[Pogo]

Instead of attacking the source, you should just acknowledge that extremists exist on both sides.


. . . so O'Keefe found another Art School drop out. . . Big Deal. Like we wouldn't be able to find them on the other side if we were were bored and looked?

This guy is just the foil of James Alex. Whoope-De-Do.

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

In that thread the guy making the claim against the professor is the source.

Screeeeeeecccchhhh

Nnnnnnape. He's the actor. A source is a third person. You can't be both.

What is the definition of primary and secondary source?

• A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed; a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document created by such a person. A secondary source is one that gives information about a primary source.

He is a primary source because he has direct knowledge of what happened because he was there. Being a source and an actor are not exclusive of each other.

Uhhhh yyyyyeah they are. You can't report on yourself.

Imagine asking, let's say, Doornail Rump where his father was born. Versus looking it up via independent source. There ya go.

So here you're trying to derail a thread about something else, into a topic that you tried to derail from what it was over there.
You must own stock in Dramamine.

 

[martybegan]

Attacking sources and not taking actual positions on things is all Poogoo has.

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

In that thread the guy making the claim against the professor is the source.

Screeeeeeecccchhhh

Nnnnnnape. He's the actor. A source is a third person. You can't be both.

What is the definition of primary and secondary source?

• A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed; a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document created by such a person. A secondary source is one that gives information about a primary source.

He is a primary source because he has direct knowledge of what happened because he was there. Being a source and an actor are not exclusive of each other.

Uhhhh yyyyyeah they are. You can't report on yourself.

Imagine asking, let's say, Doornail Rump where his father was born. Versus looking it up via independent source. There ya go.

Why not? where is that a rule? He described what happened to those sites, those sites asked rutgers for confirmation.

We are talking about the conversation had between him and the professor, he reported his view of what happened, College Reform and Briebart picked up on it, asked Rutgers for comment.

 

[Pogo]

You gotta admit it's a neat trick to "attack sources" where none exist.
(not this thread --- Marty knows damn well what I"m talking about)

However in this one I also have the old standby Ass-ociation Fallacy. Nobody has an answer for that. QED.

In that thread the guy making the claim against the professor is the source.

Screeeeeeecccchhhh

Nnnnnnape. He's the actor. A source is a third person. You can't be both.

What is the definition of primary and secondary source?

• A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed; a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document created by such a person. A secondary source is one that gives information about a primary source.

He is a primary source because he has direct knowledge of what happened because he was there. Being a source and an actor are not exclusive of each other.

Uhhhh yyyyyeah they are. You can't report on yourself.

Imagine asking, let's say, Doornail Rump where his father was born. Versus looking it up via independent source. There ya go.

Why not? where is that a rule? He described what happened to those sites, those sites asked rutgers for confirmation.

We are talking about the conversation had between him and the professor, he reported his view of what happened, College Reform and Briebart picked up on it, asked Rutgers for comment.

You know those Neptunians I told you about? The ones who landed in my yard and wanted to borrow your car?

They'll be over at 3, so be ready.

I don't have any evidence, corroboration or independent source, but not a problem. I said so, so that makes it a "thing".

 

[martybegan]

In that thread the guy making the claim against the professor is the source.

Screeeeeeecccchhhh

Nnnnnnape. He's the actor. A source is a third person. You can't be both.

What is the definition of primary and secondary source?

• A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed; a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document created by such a person. A secondary source is one that gives information about a primary source.

He is a primary source because he has direct knowledge of what happened because he was there. Being a source and an actor are not exclusive of each other.

Uhhhh yyyyyeah they are. You can't report on yourself.

Imagine asking, let's say, Doornail Rump where his father was born. Versus looking it up via independent source. There ya go.

Why not? where is that a rule? He described what happened to those sites, those sites asked rutgers for confirmation.

We are talking about the conversation had between him and the professor, he reported his view of what happened, College Reform and Briebart picked up on it, asked Rutgers for comment.

You know those Neptunians I told you about? The ones who landed in my yard and wanted to borrow your car?

They'll be over at 3, so be ready.

I don't have any evidence, corroboration or independent source, but not a problem. I said so, so that makes it a "thing".

There you go with argumentum ad absurdum again.

You didn't make the accusation publicly.
You didn't go to another party.
You havent asked the Neptunians to verify.

 

[Pogo]

Nnnnnnape. He's the actor. A source is a third person. You can't be both.

What is the definition of primary and secondary source?

• A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed; a primary source can be a person with direct knowledge of a situation, or a document created by such a person. A secondary source is one that gives information about a primary source.

He is a primary source because he has direct knowledge of what happened because he was there. Being a source and an actor are not exclusive of each other.

Uhhhh yyyyyeah they are. You can't report on yourself.

Imagine asking, let's say, Doornail Rump where his father was born. Versus looking it up via independent source. There ya go.

Why not? where is that a rule? He described what happened to those sites, those sites asked rutgers for confirmation.

We are talking about the conversation had between him and the professor, he reported his view of what happened, College Reform and Briebart picked up on it, asked Rutgers for comment.

You know those Neptunians I told you about? The ones who landed in my yard and wanted to borrow your car?

They'll be over at 3, so be ready.

I don't have any evidence, corroboration or independent source, but not a problem. I said so, so that makes it a "thing".

There you go with argumentum ad absurdum again.

You didn't make the accusation publicly.
You didn't go to another party.
You havent asked the Neptunians to verify.

This board isn't "public"?

I've been to many a party.

And I did ask the Neptunians to verify. They haven't responded. Same as Rutgers.

The question is, why are you working so hard to derail this thread, when you won't address the issue in the one where it came from?

 

[justoffal]

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

Considering it was a BERNIE supporter who shot up a baseball field full of republicans...wouldn't you think bernie would be a little more concerned about this?

Considering that the OP's source is a convicted criminal and fraud who got his ass sued for libel, wouldn't you think the OP would be a little more concerned about finding better sources?

Oh wait, I'm sorry, that's not the same thing. The OP's sources are something he actually has control over. Never mind.

PEOPLE ALSO ASK
Is James O'Keefe a convicted felon?
The charges in the case were reduced from a felony to a single misdemeanor count of entering a federal building under false pretenses. O'Keefe and the others pleaded guilty on May 26. O'Keefe was sentenced to three years' probation, 100 hours of community service and a $1,500 fine