She's back, Hillary making a prediction that women are going to die(does this include women with penis') because of Roe being overturned.

[Orangecat]

I made several on topic valid logical articulate arguments and you dismissed them all as a wall of words. That’s you just giving up.

You think women can have penises. I have no desire to debate delusional UIs.

 

[Slade3200]

You think women can have penises. I have no desire to debate delusional UIs.

I said trans women. You need to lie about my words to make an argument. That’s weak

 

[Orangecat]

I said trans women.

There's no such thing as a trans woman. That's a man with psychological issues. You've been duped by PC woke culture. Don't feel bad, millions of other gullible people have, as well.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Would it be your presumption that gay people are pretending to be gay?

False equivelancy

 

[Slade3200]

There's no such thing as a trans woman. That's a man with psychological issues. You've been duped by PC woke culture. Don't feel bad, millions of other gullible people have, as well.

If that’s what you want to call them then that’s your call but it doesn’t take away from the fact that I was correct, they do have dicks and you lied about me saying women

 

[Slade3200]

False equivelancy

Simple question. Care to answer?

 

[Orangecat]

I was correct, they do have dicks and you lied about me saying women

 

[Slade3200]

View attachment 664592

So what is it kitty… did I say that women have dicks like you claimed a couple posts ago or did you lie about that? Cause the graphic you just posted shows that you lied.

You think women can have penises. I have no desire to debate delusional UIs.

 

[scruffy]

Who defined a woman and what was the definition?

Wimminz have those little pointy boobie things.

I guess some men have them too, but they're not the same. (They're all hairy n shit)...

 

[Soupnazi630]

Simple question. Care to answer?

I did

 

[Cellblock2429]

No genius, that would not include women with penis'

/------/ You mean you aren't WOKE?

 

[Lesh]

Women WILL die...from botched abortions and suicide.

That's a FACT and why we had Roe in the first place

 

[PoliticalChic]

View attachment 664592

That one has a long history of lying.


But.....on their side of the political divide, lying counts as resume enhancement.

 

[Orangecat]

That one has a long history of lying.


But.....on their side of the political divide, lying counts as resume enhancement.

The longer these UIs talk, the more ridiculous and long winded they get. Everyone knows women don’t have penises, but the libs can’t risk offending anyone with facts.

 

[Slade3200]

That one has a long history of lying.


But.....on their side of the political divide, lying counts as resume enhancement.

see post #208… who’s lying?

 

[Slade3200]

The longer these UIs talk, the more ridiculous and long winded they get. Everyone knows women don’t have penises, but the libs can’t risk offending anyone with facts.

You claim I said chicks have dicks and then in the next post quote me saying they don’t have dicks. You’re a special kind of stupid aren’t ya?

 

[Orangecat]

You claim I said chicks have dicks and then in the next post quote me saying they don’t have dicks. You’re a special kind of stupid aren’t ya?

You're the one contradicting yourself, Forrest.

 

[Slade3200]

You're the one contradicting yourself, Forrest.

I’ll just quote your posts and let your lies speak for themselves:

You think women can have penises. I have no desire to debate delusional UIs.

 

[PoliticalChic]

see post #208… who’s lying?

You've been exposed as a liar more than once.


...are you ready to admit that every state that allowed courts to alter he methods and times of voting infracted the Constitution????

===========================================

“Wrong. Even if a state agency broke a law or rule in their execution of running an election, that would not delegitimize the entire election. The case would be taken to the courts for review and judgement. That’s what the constitution directs to happen. That’s what happened. The courts did not determine the election to be illegitimate. The results stood. That’s how it works.”
If There Was No Fraud, Why? post 393





Did you see this week the Supreme Court will take up exactly what I said, and you denied???

1. The Trump election was stolen in those states where courts and attorneys general changed the manner of the national election.

I've said it all along, and, as usual.....I've been correct.



2. Now.....finally......the Supreme Court is muttering about taking up the constitutional basis for the theft of the election.....and I'm bettin' that they finally do what they should have done right after the election




3. "Supreme Court to take on controversial election-law case

June 30, 202210:50 AM ET

The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case that could dramatically change how federal elections are conducted. At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, free of supervision by the state courts and state constitutions.



The theory, known as the "independent state legislature theory," stems from the election clause in Article I of the Constitution. It says, "The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof."



Proponents of the theory argue that that clause gives state legislatures power to regulate federal elections uninhibited by state courts or state constitutions. If a majority of the Supreme Court agrees, that would hamstring state courts, removing judicial oversight of state elections.



"Taken to its extreme, the independent state legislature doctrine could be an earthquake in American election law and fundamentally alter the balance of power within states and provide a pathway to subvert election results," says professor Richard Hasen, an expert on election law from the University of California, Irvine."

Supreme Court to take on controversial election-law case

At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, free of supervision by state courts and state constitutions.

www.npr.org

 

[PoliticalChic]

You're the one contradicting yourself, Forrest.

They use words, but they don't know what they mean.