Uh Oh, Melania's speech was plagiarized

[Howey]

Much of it was taken from Mrs. Obama's 2008 speech. 22 out of 26 words directly lifted.

What do Joe Biden, Barack Obama and Melania Trump all have in common? They all have plagerized a speech.

7 Democrats Who Were Caught For Plagiarism, Including Obama And Biden

The big difference between Malania and the other two plagiarizers......she wasn't running for president when she did it.

That was pretty sad link and not very convincing.

The claims also been disproven.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

ChrisL, post: 14799022

Well, I don't think Michelle is an ape.

That was not the point of my message. Trump has a poor record when it comes keeping his word in marriage. The Obama's are the embodiment of Michele's words that Melania admired and lifted.

And then there are Trump's bankruptcies. His word means nothing.

 

[Pogo]

22 words out of a 14 minute speech....HOLY SHIT, THE FAGERALS ARE SO ******* AFRAID, THEY GRAB AT ANYTHING!

Takes a special kind of stupid indeed to go on flogging a dead horse AFTER your "side" has already copped to it.

When you lose your keys, and then find them --- do you still go on looking?
Idiot.

 

[Redfish]

don't be such a dipshit. When a candidate is attacked on shit like this its nothing but an attempt to get voters to change their minds. Are you really as stupid as you appear?

AH, so you're the Amazing Kreskin are you? You're reading my mind as we speak?
What number am I thinking of right now?

Spoiler: Check your answer here

Since when do you vote for FLOTUS --- DUMBASS?

If not to try to affect the election, why do it?

In the case of the articles and videos cited, because it's news, and it's news because it reeks of dishonesty during the fact and blatant failure to take responsibility after it.

In the case of this board, because it demonstrates how far you self-deluded partisan hacks will stretch to pull the blinders over your eyes and go "baaaaa' even after it's been admitted to.

And that speaks of dishonesty too. With a frickin' megaphone. That you're actually willing to deny the existence of reality speaks volumes, and they're all turned up to 11.

​

--- or to put it another way:

"When the known facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

you took a lot of words to do it, but you agreed with me. This kind of crap is designed to influence the election by calling one candidate or the other a liar or a cheat.

That's all I said, and you agreed. do you like to argue just for the sake of arguing?

 

[Redfish]

If this thread is designed to attack the integrity of the Trump family, then we should also look into the integrity of the Clinton family------------------are you on the left ready to do that?

 

[Pogo]

don't be such a dipshit. When a candidate is attacked on shit like this its nothing but an attempt to get voters to change their minds. Are you really as stupid as you appear?

AH, so you're the Amazing Kreskin are you? You're reading my mind as we speak?
What number am I thinking of right now?

Spoiler: Check your answer here

Since when do you vote for FLOTUS --- DUMBASS?

If not to try to affect the election, why do it?

In the case of the articles and videos cited, because it's news, and it's news because it reeks of dishonesty during the fact and blatant failure to take responsibility after it.

In the case of this board, because it demonstrates how far you self-deluded partisan hacks will stretch to pull the blinders over your eyes and go "baaaaa' even after it's been admitted to.

And that speaks of dishonesty too. With a frickin' megaphone. That you're actually willing to deny the existence of reality speaks volumes, and they're all turned up to 11.

​

--- or to put it another way:

"When the known facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

you took a lot of words to do it, but you agreed with me. This kind of crap is designed to influence the election by calling one candidate or the other a liar or a cheat.

That's all I said, and you agreed. do you like to argue just for the sake of arguing?

Once again for the slow kids NONE of what I've posted here is about any "election" -- NOR do we vote for frigging wives of candidates anyway so it's entirely irrelevant. Melania is not a ******* candidate.

What I'm exploring is the psychology of self-delusion that's jumping up and down here. Denying plagiarism exists when it's clearly there. Then in the same breath blaming Hillary Clinton for what you just said does not exist. Then having a staffer take a sword, meaning it apparently DOES exist, and never in any of it acknowledging reality. And then moron posters here STILL going on flogging the dead horse AFTER it's been not only documented but admitted to. That's what I'm posting on --- the outright denial of ******* reality. The Doublethink.

You cannot do that on Planet Reality. An event either exists, or it does not exist. You CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. And when it does exist --- you have to take responsibility for it. You DO NOT get a choice.

What the issue is, who cares. It's meaningless. What's meaningful is the way it's handled. It bespeaks an arrogant outright Denialism and complete failure to take any responsibility for anything whatsoever, ever.

---- which is what I've been pointing out about Rump himself the entire time this circus has been going on. A completely irresponsible self-infatuated world of self-delusion.

See if you can figure that out.

 

[Redfish]

don't be such a dipshit. When a candidate is attacked on shit like this its nothing but an attempt to get voters to change their minds. Are you really as stupid as you appear?

AH, so you're the Amazing Kreskin are you? You're reading my mind as we speak?
What number am I thinking of right now?

Spoiler: Check your answer here

Since when do you vote for FLOTUS --- DUMBASS?

If not to try to affect the election, why do it?

In the case of the articles and videos cited, because it's news, and it's news because it reeks of dishonesty during the fact and blatant failure to take responsibility after it.

In the case of this board, because it demonstrates how far you self-deluded partisan hacks will stretch to pull the blinders over your eyes and go "baaaaa' even after it's been admitted to.

And that speaks of dishonesty too. With a frickin' megaphone. That you're actually willing to deny the existence of reality speaks volumes, and they're all turned up to 11.

​

--- or to put it another way:

"When the known facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

you took a lot of words to do it, but you agreed with me. This kind of crap is designed to influence the election by calling one candidate or the other a liar or a cheat.

That's all I said, and you agreed. do you like to argue just for the sake of arguing?

Once again for the slow kids NONE of what I've posted here is about any "election" -- NOR do we vote for frigging wives of candidates anyway so it's entirely irrelevant. Melania is not a ******* candidate.

What I'm exploring is the psychology of self-delusion that's jumping up and down here. Denying plagiarism exists when it's clearly there. Then in the same breath blaming Hillary Clinton for what you just said does not exist. Then having a staffer take a sword, meaning it apparently DOES exist, and never in any of it acknowledging reality. And then moron posters here STILL going on flogging the dead horse AFTER it's been not only documented but admitted to. That's what I'm posting on --- the outright denial of ******* reality. The Doublethink.

What the issue is, who cares. It's meaningless. What's meaningful is the way it's handled. It bespeaks an arrogant outright Denialism and complete failure to take any responsibility for anything whatsoever, ever.

---- which is what I've been pointing out about Rump himself the entire time this circus has been going on.

See if you can figure that out.

first of all, just because two people use the same phrase does not mean one stole it from the other, it may be that they just think the same on that issue.

The speech writer admitted that he should have looked at previous wives speeches to preclude that foolish waste of time that is going on here.

You think this shows that the Trump organization does not know "how to handle things" ? I think that's what you implied. Should we talk about Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, using a private server, attacking rape victims, getting fired from the Watergate committee, etc in the same context?

Sorry, pogohead, but this shit goes both ways, and there is a lot more shit to dig on your side.

 

[gipper]

don't be such a dipshit. When a candidate is attacked on shit like this its nothing but an attempt to get voters to change their minds. Are you really as stupid as you appear?

AH, so you're the Amazing Kreskin are you? You're reading my mind as we speak?
What number am I thinking of right now?

Spoiler: Check your answer here

Since when do you vote for FLOTUS --- DUMBASS?

If not to try to affect the election, why do it?

In the case of the articles and videos cited, because it's news, and it's news because it reeks of dishonesty during the fact and blatant failure to take responsibility after it.

In the case of this board, because it demonstrates how far you self-deluded partisan hacks will stretch to pull the blinders over your eyes and go "baaaaa' even after it's been admitted to.

And that speaks of dishonesty too. With a frickin' megaphone. That you're actually willing to deny the existence of reality speaks volumes, and they're all turned up to 11.

​

--- or to put it another way:

"When the known facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

you took a lot of words to do it, but you agreed with me. This kind of crap is designed to influence the election by calling one candidate or the other a liar or a cheat.

That's all I said, and you agreed. do you like to argue just for the sake of arguing?

Once again for the slow kids NONE of what I've posted here is about any "election" -- NOR do we vote for frigging wives of candidates anyway so it's entirely irrelevant. Melania is not a ******* candidate.

What I'm exploring is the psychology of self-delusion that's jumping up and down here. Denying plagiarism exists when it's clearly there. Then in the same breath blaming Hillary Clinton for what you just said does not exist. Then having a staffer take a sword, meaning it apparently DOES exist, and never in any of it acknowledging reality. And then moron posters here STILL going on flogging the dead horse AFTER it's been not only documented but admitted to. That's what I'm posting on --- the outright denial of ******* reality. The Doublethink.

What the issue is, who cares. It's meaningless. What's meaningful is the way it's handled. It bespeaks an arrogant outright Denialism and complete failure to take any responsibility for anything whatsoever, ever.

---- which is what I've been pointing out about Rump himself the entire time this circus has been going on.

See if you can figure that out.

first of all, just because two people use the same phrase does not mean one stole it from the other, it may be that they just think the same on that issue.

The speech writer admitted that he should have looked at previous wives speeches to preclude that foolish waste of time that is going on here.

You think this shows that the Trump organization does not know "how to handle things" ? I think that's what you implied. Should we talk about Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, using a private server, attacking rape victims, getting fired from the Watergate committee, etc in the same context?

Sorry, pogohead, but this shit goes both ways, and there is a lot more shit to dig on your side.

This is a non-story, but it proves once again how the liberal media can drive a narrative that dupes millions.

Hillary and her husband have lied repeatedly about serious matters and the MSM ignores.

Tells you how fucked up things are in this country. The MSM is the fifth column.

 

[Redfish]

don't be such a dipshit. When a candidate is attacked on shit like this its nothing but an attempt to get voters to change their minds. Are you really as stupid as you appear?

AH, so you're the Amazing Kreskin are you? You're reading my mind as we speak?
What number am I thinking of right now?

Spoiler: Check your answer here

Since when do you vote for FLOTUS --- DUMBASS?

If not to try to affect the election, why do it?

In the case of the articles and videos cited, because it's news, and it's news because it reeks of dishonesty during the fact and blatant failure to take responsibility after it.

In the case of this board, because it demonstrates how far you self-deluded partisan hacks will stretch to pull the blinders over your eyes and go "baaaaa' even after it's been admitted to.

And that speaks of dishonesty too. With a frickin' megaphone. That you're actually willing to deny the existence of reality speaks volumes, and they're all turned up to 11.

​

--- or to put it another way:

"When the known facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"

you took a lot of words to do it, but you agreed with me. This kind of crap is designed to influence the election by calling one candidate or the other a liar or a cheat.

That's all I said, and you agreed. do you like to argue just for the sake of arguing?

Once again for the slow kids NONE of what I've posted here is about any "election" -- NOR do we vote for frigging wives of candidates anyway so it's entirely irrelevant. Melania is not a ******* candidate.

What I'm exploring is the psychology of self-delusion that's jumping up and down here. Denying plagiarism exists when it's clearly there. Then in the same breath blaming Hillary Clinton for what you just said does not exist. Then having a staffer take a sword, meaning it apparently DOES exist, and never in any of it acknowledging reality. And then moron posters here STILL going on flogging the dead horse AFTER it's been not only documented but admitted to. That's what I'm posting on --- the outright denial of ******* reality. The Doublethink.

What the issue is, who cares. It's meaningless. What's meaningful is the way it's handled. It bespeaks an arrogant outright Denialism and complete failure to take any responsibility for anything whatsoever, ever.

---- which is what I've been pointing out about Rump himself the entire time this circus has been going on.

See if you can figure that out.

first of all, just because two people use the same phrase does not mean one stole it from the other, it may be that they just think the same on that issue.

The speech writer admitted that he should have looked at previous wives speeches to preclude that foolish waste of time that is going on here.

You think this shows that the Trump organization does not know "how to handle things" ? I think that's what you implied. Should we talk about Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, using a private server, attacking rape victims, getting fired from the Watergate committee, etc in the same context?

Sorry, pogohead, but this shit goes both ways, and there is a lot more shit to dig on your side.

This is a non-story, but it proves once again how the liberal media can drive a narrative that dupes millions.

Hillary and her husband have lied repeatedly about serious matters and the MSM ignores.

Tells you how fucked up things are in this country. The MSM is the fifth column.

its actually worse than that, the MSM has become the state controlled media. They might as well rename them Pravda.

 

[A Perez]

Much of it was taken from Mrs. Obama's 2008 speech. 22 out of 26 words directly lifted.

No it wasn't. You're lying!

You were proved wrong.

 

[Pogo]

first of all, just because two people use the same phrase does not mean one stole it from the other, it may be that they just think the same on that issue.

See what I mean? You're STILL doing it. It's not a matter of "phrases" and you damn well know it --- it's a matter of whole paragraphs.

Further demonstrating, once again, that the question here is not "how did Michelle Obama's speech get in there". It's there, however it arrived, who cares. The question is the outright denial of the reality that it is there, as you just demonstrated. And then there's Paul Manafort, who first declared it wasn't there, then blamed Hillary Clinton (for what isn't there) -- and then just wanted to "move on". See any acknowledgement of institutional responsibility there at all?

The speech writer admitted that he should have looked at previous wives speeches to preclude that foolish waste of time that is going on here.

And there it is again --- in the last paragraph you're denying it exists, next paragraph in the SAME POST --- you're admitting to it. Can't have it both ways dood. DOES IT EXIST or DOES IT NOT? There's no way around that question.

You think this shows that the Trump organization does not know "how to handle things" ? I think that's what you implied. Should we talk about Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, using a private server, attacking rape victims, getting fired from the Watergate committee, etc in the same context?

I'm sure you wish the topic could be shunted to Benghazi, Watergate, Teapot Dome, the Petticoat Affair, anything that would take the spotlight off the guilty party and let them get away scot free. Ain't gonna happen. What cowardice. Can't face the issue.

Sorry, pogohead, but this shit goes both ways, and there is a lot more shit to dig on your side.

My "side" is and always has been the Truth. The Facts. Unlike your ilk I'm not afraid of them, nor am I trying to derail the topic off to Bo Belinsky or what Joe Biden wrote in 1926. I've been relentlessly pounding the point that Donald Rump has never taken any kind of responsibility for anything in his life, never admitted to a bankruptcy or any kind of fuckup, any time anywhere. That's because he lives in his self-delusional little bubble and that culture extends to his campaign, which just monkeys the same psychological bullshit. And he won't acknowledge this one either for the same very simple reason: he doesn't have the balls.

It's a pattern, a deeply established one, and as long as he goes on continuing it he just proves my observation right.

 

[Faun]

So, now they're trying whitewash Melania's plagiarism by blaming a staff writer - even after SHE admitted writing her speech. So funny...

TRUMP STAFFER FALLS ON SWORD: MELANIA SPEECH ‘MY MISTAKE’

But.... but..... didn't they just flatly deny yesterday that plagiarism existed?

What, do we shift reality universes every other day with this clan? Because this would mean either this is a lie, or yesterday was. And then there's Melania claiming she wrote it, which makes at least two.

Tangled web.

More than that -- all the brain-dead rightwingers, on forums like this one, adamantly denying that part of Melania's speech was plagiarized despite it containing nearly 2 paragraphs of almost word-for-word text. The Trump campaign just exposed them as the boot-locking sycophants they are.

 

[gipper]

first of all, just because two people use the same phrase does not mean one stole it from the other, it may be that they just think the same on that issue.

See what I mean? You're STILL doing it. It's not a matter of "phrases" and you damn well know it --- it's a matter of whole paragraphs.

Further demonstrating, once again, that the question here is not "how did Michelle Obama's speech get in there". It's there, however it arrived, who cares. The question is the outright denial of the reality that it is there, as you just demonstrated. And then there's Paul Manafort, who first declared it wasn't there, then blamed Hillary Clinton (for what isn't there) -- and then just wanted to "move on". See any acknowledgement of institutional responsibility there at all?

The speech writer admitted that he should have looked at previous wives speeches to preclude that foolish waste of time that is going on here.

And there it is again --- in the last paragraph you're denying it exists, next paragraph in the SAME POST --- you're admitting to it. Can't have it both ways dood. DOES IT EXIST or DOES IT NOT? There's no way around that question.

You think this shows that the Trump organization does not know "how to handle things" ? I think that's what you implied. Should we talk about Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, using a private server, attacking rape victims, getting fired from the Watergate committee, etc in the same context?

I'm sure you wish the topic could be shunted to Benghazi, Watergate, Teapot Dome, the Petticoat Affair, anything that would take the spotlight off the guilty party and let them get away scot free. Ain't gonna happen. What cowardice. Can't face the issue.

Sorry, pogohead, but this shit goes both ways, and there is a lot more shit to dig on your side.

My "side" is and always has been the Truth. The Facts. Unlike your ilk I'm not afraid of them, nor am I trying to derail the topic off to Bo Belinsky or what Joe Biden wrote in 1926. I've been relentlessly pounding the point that Donald Rump has never taken any kind of responsibility for anything in his life, never admitted to a bankruptcy or any kind of fuckup, any time anywhere. That's because he lives in his self-delusional little bubble and that culture extends to his campaign, which just monkeys the same psychological bullshit. And he won't acknowledge this one either for the same very simple reason: he doesn't have the balls.

It's a pattern, a deeply established one, and as long as he goes on continuing it he just proves my observation right.

If only people like you would spend equal effort researching the actions and statements of the Clinton's and Obama's.

 

[Redfish]

Much of it was taken from Mrs. Obama's 2008 speech. 22 out of 26 words directly lifted.

No it wasn't. You're lying!

You were proved wrong.

the two speeches were compared word for word earlier in the thread. If you really care, go back and find it. This whole thing is BS.

 

[Pogo]

first of all, just because two people use the same phrase does not mean one stole it from the other, it may be that they just think the same on that issue.

See what I mean? You're STILL doing it. It's not a matter of "phrases" and you damn well know it --- it's a matter of whole paragraphs.

Further demonstrating, once again, that the question here is not "how did Michelle Obama's speech get in there". It's there, however it arrived, who cares. The question is the outright denial of the reality that it is there, as you just demonstrated. And then there's Paul Manafort, who first declared it wasn't there, then blamed Hillary Clinton (for what isn't there) -- and then just wanted to "move on". See any acknowledgement of institutional responsibility there at all?

The speech writer admitted that he should have looked at previous wives speeches to preclude that foolish waste of time that is going on here.

And there it is again --- in the last paragraph you're denying it exists, next paragraph in the SAME POST --- you're admitting to it. Can't have it both ways dood. DOES IT EXIST or DOES IT NOT? There's no way around that question.

You think this shows that the Trump organization does not know "how to handle things" ? I think that's what you implied. Should we talk about Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, using a private server, attacking rape victims, getting fired from the Watergate committee, etc in the same context?

I'm sure you wish the topic could be shunted to Benghazi, Watergate, Teapot Dome, the Petticoat Affair, anything that would take the spotlight off the guilty party and let them get away scot free. Ain't gonna happen. What cowardice. Can't face the issue.

Sorry, pogohead, but this shit goes both ways, and there is a lot more shit to dig on your side.

My "side" is and always has been the Truth. The Facts. Unlike your ilk I'm not afraid of them, nor am I trying to derail the topic off to Bo Belinsky or what Joe Biden wrote in 1926. I've been relentlessly pounding the point that Donald Rump has never taken any kind of responsibility for anything in his life, never admitted to a bankruptcy or any kind of fuckup, any time anywhere. That's because he lives in his self-delusional little bubble and that culture extends to his campaign, which just monkeys the same psychological bullshit. And he won't acknowledge this one either for the same very simple reason: he doesn't have the balls.

It's a pattern, a deeply established one, and as long as he goes on continuing it he just proves my observation right.

If only people like you would spend equal effort researching the actions and statements of the Clinton's and Obama's.

If I had a penny for every wanker that's popped in here desperately trying to change the subject, I could buy Melania a new teleprompter.

 

[Redfish]

So, now they're trying whitewash Melania's plagiarism by blaming a staff writer - even after SHE admitted writing her speech. So funny...

TRUMP STAFFER FALLS ON SWORD: MELANIA SPEECH ‘MY MISTAKE’

But.... but..... didn't they just flatly deny yesterday that plagiarism existed?

What, do we shift reality universes every other day with this clan? Because this would mean either this is a lie, or yesterday was. And then there's Melania claiming she wrote it, which makes at least two.

Tangled web.

More than that -- all the brain-dead rightwingers, on forums like this one, adamantly denying that part of Melania's speech was plagiarized despite it containing nearly 2 paragraphs of almost word-for-word text. The Trump campaign just exposed them as the boot-locking sycophants they are.

then you should easily be able to post the words from the two speeches and compare them "word for word" Do it !

 

[Redfish]

first of all, just because two people use the same phrase does not mean one stole it from the other, it may be that they just think the same on that issue.

See what I mean? You're STILL doing it. It's not a matter of "phrases" and you damn well know it --- it's a matter of whole paragraphs.

Further demonstrating, once again, that the question here is not "how did Michelle Obama's speech get in there". It's there, however it arrived, who cares. The question is the outright denial of the reality that it is there, as you just demonstrated. And then there's Paul Manafort, who first declared it wasn't there, then blamed Hillary Clinton (for what isn't there) -- and then just wanted to "move on". See any acknowledgement of institutional responsibility there at all?

The speech writer admitted that he should have looked at previous wives speeches to preclude that foolish waste of time that is going on here.

And there it is again --- in the last paragraph you're denying it exists, next paragraph in the SAME POST --- you're admitting to it. Can't have it both ways dood. DOES IT EXIST or DOES IT NOT? There's no way around that question.

You think this shows that the Trump organization does not know "how to handle things" ? I think that's what you implied. Should we talk about Benghazi, the Clinton foundation, using a private server, attacking rape victims, getting fired from the Watergate committee, etc in the same context?

I'm sure you wish the topic could be shunted to Benghazi, Watergate, Teapot Dome, the Petticoat Affair, anything that would take the spotlight off the guilty party and let them get away scot free. Ain't gonna happen. What cowardice. Can't face the issue.

Sorry, pogohead, but this shit goes both ways, and there is a lot more shit to dig on your side.

My "side" is and always has been the Truth. The Facts. Unlike your ilk I'm not afraid of them, nor am I trying to derail the topic off to Bo Belinsky or what Joe Biden wrote in 1926. I've been relentlessly pounding the point that Donald Rump has never taken any kind of responsibility for anything in his life, never admitted to a bankruptcy or any kind of fuckup, any time anywhere. That's because he lives in his self-delusional little bubble and that culture extends to his campaign, which just monkeys the same psychological bullshit. And he won't acknowledge this one either for the same very simple reason: he doesn't have the balls.

It's a pattern, a deeply established one, and as long as he goes on continuing it he just proves my observation right.

If only people like you would spend equal effort researching the actions and statements of the Clinton's and Obama's.

If I had a penny for every wanker that's popped in here desperately trying to change the subject, I could buy Melania a new teleprompter.

If I had a penny for every left wing asshole who posted lies on USMB, I could buy Trump tower.

No one is trying to change the subject. The two women expressed the same sentiment in the same words, BFD.

We have muslim terrorists trying to kill us all, we have BLM killing cops, and you idiots are obsessed with this BS? This country is sick.

 

[Pogo]

Much of it was taken from Mrs. Obama's 2008 speech. 22 out of 26 words directly lifted.

No it wasn't. You're lying!

You were proved wrong.

the two speeches were compared word for word earlier in the thread. If you really care, go back and find it. This whole thing is BS.

They sure were, many times. There's just no way around this.

​

Here they are in tandem.

​

Now go try to do that with two other speeches that are actually not related. Rotsa ruck. You can literally dub one voice over the image of the other.
McRacist knows this. He had at least enough sense to run away rather than keep on flogging a dead horse that's already acknowledged its own death.

How you can sit there and deny what's sitting right there in front of you, even after you yourself admitted to it, is a question only a shrink can answer.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is such a non-issue.

 

[Redfish]

Much of it was taken from Mrs. Obama's 2008 speech. 22 out of 26 words directly lifted.

No it wasn't. You're lying!

You were proved wrong.

the two speeches were compared word for word earlier in the thread. If you really care, go back and find it. This whole thing is BS.

They sure were, many times. There's just no way around this.

​

Here they are in tandem.

​

Now go try to do that with two other speeches that are actually not related. Rotsa ruck. You can literally dub one voice over the image of the other.
McRacist knows this. He had at least enough sense to run away rather than keep on flogging a dead horse that's already acknowledged its own death.

How you can sit there and deny what's sitting right there in front of you, even after you yourself admitted to it, is a question only a shrink can answer.

I have watched this several times. The first phrase uses the same words. That does not prove that they were plagiarized.

To my earlier example: if in 2008 I said "I like ice cream" and then in 2016 you said "I like ice cream", does that prove that you got those words from me?

the plagiarism of the Clintons and Obama have been displayed several times. Who cares?

I am done with this thread, its bullshit that will have zero impact on the election.