Paki gob on a stick wrote on Jul 23
rd, 2026 at 4:36pm:
lee wrote on Jul 23
rd, 2026 at 3:55pm:
Paki gob on a stick wrote on Jul 22
nd, 2026 at 11:40pm:
Right, so you're done.
So says poor karny. Whenever he gets shot down on this bogus claims he reverts to "Saint Joe".
No no, if you refuse to say, you need to tell us why.
We're fine to give you options. We do like a decent multiple choice, dear.
You, Lee, refuse to say because:
a) You're a little bit butthurt. Bobby was in the other bed when the leftards and modern classics popped round.
b) The cat has your tongue.
c) You can't bear to say a bad thing about DL -
ever.
d) Yes, Master.
Kindly select a response. If you refuse again, one will be selected for you.
It was a close call between A and D, Lee, but let's get real.
You're not butthurt, dear, you're totally
under his command. You don't even feel it going in. No one with any neurological functioning would regurgitate the kind of responses you have in this thread. Your only articulate responses have been your giggles.
The rewritten AI feeds, the irrelevant propaganda, the absurd hits on Sleepy Joe. The excuses, the shifting goalposts, the invention of legal terms like "criminal liability", your own lies betraying your lack of understanding of even basic terms of reference.
It's almost hard to believe you come from a prosperous, developed and free country. Good education, a free media, one of the most representative democracies in the world.
But this is
willful ignorance,
doublethink, the ability as Orwell put it, to say that two plus two equals five. Typically, that happens in authoritarian regimes like Russia and Chi-na. What you've shown is that even so-called free people long, as Goebbels put it, to submit, to give into their
overwhelming desire to obey.Now, we know you'll claim the exact opposite - that everybody
else is deluded. But, here in this thread, you've had the opportunity to prove your case. We've been most patient, following up on your propositions, reading your links, clarifying your AI searches. We've done, as you say, your homework for you, summarizing your sources, clarifying and giving you the opportunity to respond at every turn.
Your responses have been abrupt, to say the least. It's as if you didn't
want to prove your case, offering up giggles and smug one-liners rather than any actual facts. Your argument itself, of course, is your go-to standby;
they're all as bad as each other.
As we've seen in this thread, of course, is that nothing could be further from the truth. When asked to show
who's as bad as each other, you got all tongue-tied. You won't even say why you refuse to say it.
Now, you've asked us to select the answer for you, but we're not done yet. We have one short answer question left. The question is
why.
Why would you try to excuse and cover up the most blatant corruption we've ever seen by a US prez? You spent four years ranting about Bengazi and Burisma and laptops from hell. Why are you now turning the other cheek to the most brazen acts of theft by a US prez in US history?
In one of your responses, you tried telling us DL wasn't responsible for his DOJ lawsuit, his "administration" was. So, the last question left, and the most telling, is
why. Please explain?
Forum
Pages: 
