American war dead are "Losers and Suckers," per Trump

#227
#227
Orange_Crush said:
No what? No, the inverse logic isn't true? Or no, you don't believe Q?

You seem to be hemmed in by your own enforced logic on the Qers. If they have to believe your anonymous sources, you have to believe theirs, by your logic.

(You could all save yourselves the egg on face by taking a "let's just see about that" on all of it.)
Click to expand...

At what point did I ever say anybody had to believe any anonymous sources?
 
#230
#230
dig303lau3821.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan, OHvol40 and Tyler Durden
#231
#231
clarksvol00 said:
At what point did I ever say anybody had to believe any anonymous sources?
Click to expand...
When you called them hypocrites for believing Q, but not this story.

But OK, we can play it the other way if it makes you feel better. Why do you believe this story and not Q, while calling Qers hypocrites for believing Q and not this story?

See how whataboutism (even when it's not imaginary future-tense role-playing projection) really just ends up biting you in the *** when someone that can think critically forces you to look in the mirror? All you're doing is admitting that you are what you claim to dislike, but making excuses for it because the people you dislike are supposedly that way too.

You're just basically saying, "You're a piece of ****. Well, maybe I am too, but that's OK because... You're a piece of ****."

Wouldn't it be better to be able to make the argument about yourself that you're not a piece of ****?"
 
#234
#234
Orange_Crush said:
When you called them hypocrites for believing Q, but not this story.

But OK, we can play it the other way if it makes you feel better. Why do you believe this story and not Q, while calling Qers hypocrites for believing Q and not this story?

See how whataboutism (even when it's not imaginary future-tense role-playing projection) really just ends up biting you in the ass when someone that can think critically forces you to look in the mirror? All you're doing is admitting that you are what you claim to dislike, but making excuses for it because the people you dislike are supposedly that way too.

You're just basically saying, "You're a piece of ****. Well, maybe I am too, but that's OK because... You're a piece of ****."

Wouldn't it be better to be able to make the argument about yourself that you're not a piece of ****?"
Click to expand...

At what point did I say I believed this story?
 
#235
#235
Orange_Crush said:
When you called them hypocrites for believing Q, but not this story.

But OK, we can play it the other way if it makes you feel better. Why do you believe this story and not Q, while calling Qers hypocrites for believing Q and not this story?

See how whataboutism (even when it's not imaginary future-tense role-playing projection) really just ends up biting you in the ass when someone that can think critically forces you to look in the mirror? All you're doing is admitting that you are what you claim to dislike, but making excuses for it because the people you dislike are supposedly that way too.

You're just basically saying, "You're a piece of ****. Well, maybe I am too, but that's OK because... You're a piece of ****."

Wouldn't it be better to be able to make the argument about yourself that you're not a piece of ****?"
Click to expand...
Anyone who believes in Q is a pitiful rube.
 
#236
#236
Although the article says Kelly declined to be interviewed, I believe he's gotta be one of the four sources.
 
#237
#237
clarksvol00 said:
At what point did I say I believed this story?
Click to expand...

Look how cute. Painted in a corner and playing coy.

clarksvol00 said:
I suspect they fear some kind of retribution from one of the most powerful men in the world and if the John Kelly part hadn't happened, Kelly would have said so. But that's just my opinion, which is worth as much as that of everybody else posting here.
Click to expand...
 
#242
#242
Has Fox started with the "this was a George Soros funded job to shift attention away from what really matters: shampoo-gate" conspiracy theory yet?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top