Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 7:39 PM, Buffalo Timmy said:

Are just being a pedantic twit because you know it is possible she is the leaker? Otherwise show me something

Expand  


No - that would be you making egregious claims and not being able to back it up.
 

Unfortunately - you do not have the credibility for anyone to just take your word by making such accusations.

 

Back it up or just admit you are full of it because at the end of the day - you would have provided the proof if you could.
 

 

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 8:01 PM, BillStime said:


No - that would be you making egregious claims and not being able to back it up.
 

Unfortunately - you do not have the credibility for anyone to just take your word by making such accusations.

 

Back it up or just admit you are full of it because at the end of the day - you would have provided the proof if you could.
 

 

Expand  

There go lying again, I did not state she was the leaker, I asked who it was since you said she could not have been it. You have shown no evidence of anything except admitting that you know that she has access to the building since she is a supreme court justice. 

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 8:56 PM, Buffalo Timmy said:

There go lying again, I did not state she was the leaker, I asked who it was since you said she could not have been it. You have shown no evidence of anything except admitting that you know that she has access to the building since she is a supreme court justice. 

Expand  


lol - here we go again - deflecting to lies when you are trapped in a corner.

 

Let’s revisit your accusation:

 

  On 5/6/2022 at 12:00 AM, Buffalo Timmy said:

she has access to the building and intranet where the memo was made

Expand  


Please source where this woman has access to the building.

 

No more kicking and screaming lol

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 9:09 PM, BillStime said:


lol - here we go again - deflecting to lies when you are trapped in a corner.

 

Let’s revisit your accusation:

 


Please source where this woman has access to the building.

 

No more kicking and screaming lol

Expand  

She is a confirmed supreme court justice- she has access to the buildings- do you think they bar her from entry until she is gonna sit on the bench? You literally asked me to prove that a supreme court justice has access to the supreme court building. 

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 9:30 PM, Buffalo Timmy said:

She is a confirmed supreme court justice- she has access to the buildings- do you think they bar her from entry until she is gonna sit on the bench? You literally asked me to prove that a supreme court justice has access to the supreme court building. 

Expand  


This is hilarious.

 

  On 5/6/2022 at 12:00 AM, Buffalo Timmy said:

she has access to the building and intranet where the memo was made

Expand  


PROVE THIS - your word means NOTHING.

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 10:48 PM, BillStime said:


This is hilarious.

 


PROVE THIS - your word means NOTHING.

Expand  

As I have stated previously i often think you are a staunch conservative who is trying to prove how out of touch liberals are and it is due to this kind of stuff, demanding proof that a supreme court justice is allowed to work in the supreme court building. There is no evidence that she is not working there currently. 

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 10:57 PM, Buffalo Timmy said:

As I have stated previously i often think you are a staunch conservative who is trying to prove how out of touch liberals are and it is due to this kind of stuff, demanding proof that a supreme court justice is allowed to work in the supreme court building. There is no evidence that she is not working there currently. 

Expand  


Why would a judge, who has not been sworn in - have access to anything?

 

YOU are claiming she is already in the building w access - PROVE IT.

 

Where in our laws and procedures does it say she can have access early?

 

lol

 

TAKE THE L

 

lolzzzzz

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 11:07 PM, BillStime said:


Why would a judge, who has not been sworn in - have access to anything?

 

YOU are claiming she is already in the building w access - PROVE IT.

 

Where in our laws and procedures does it say she can have access early?

 

lol

 

TAKE THE L

 

lolzzzzz

Expand  

Last time, she is confirmed, therefore she has access. Sandra Day O'Connor was working in the building within a few days of being confirmed according to her own words, she did not comment on the intranet. So why would they now make KBJ wait? So she can be behind when she is finally seated?

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 11:38 PM, Buffalo Timmy said:

Last time, she is confirmed, therefore she has access. Sandra Day O'Connor was working in the building within a few days of being confirmed according to her own words, she did not comment on the intranet. So why would they now make KBJ wait? So she can be behind when she is finally seated?

Expand  


BECAUSE THE JUDGE KBJ IS REPLACING IS FINISHING HiS TERM.

 

Sandra Day O’Connor replaced Potter Stewart who retired in July 3, 1981.

 

Regan nominated SDO in August 19, 1981, confirmed September 21 and her term started on September 25.
 

SDO didn’t have to wait because her predecessor was already gone.

 

You’re a teacher? Yikes

Posted
  On 5/6/2022 at 11:58 PM, BillStime said:


BECAUSE THE JUDGE KBJ IS REPLACING IS FINISHING HiS TERM.

 

Sandra Day O’Connor replaced Potter Stewart who retired in July 3, 1981.

 

Regan nominated SDO in August 19, 1981, confirmed September 21 and her term started on September 25.
 

SDO didn’t have to wait because her predecessor was already gone.

 

You’re a teacher? Yikes

Expand  

So you have done research to show a difference, you have not shown that she has not been in the building. Show me definitely she has not been in the building and I will agree she is not the leak. I am curious why it is so important to you she is not the leak?

Posted
  On 5/7/2022 at 12:11 AM, Buffalo Timmy said:

So you have done research to show a difference, you have not shown that she has not been in the building. Show me definitely she has not been in the building and I will agree she is not the leak. I am curious why it is so important to you she is not the leak?

Expand  


No no no no no no no no no - that’s not how this works.

 

YOU MADE THE CLAIM

YOU BACK IT UP

 

PS: I could give two shitz who leaked it AND I am not trying to protect anyone but if someone is going to make a bogus claim - like those in the cult do ALL the time - I am going to speak up.

 

 

 

 

Posted
  On 5/7/2022 at 12:38 AM, BillStime said:


No no no no no no no no no - that’s not how this works.

 

YOU MADE THE CLAIM

YOU BACK IT UP

 

PS: I could give two shitz who leaked it AND I am not trying to protect anyone but if someone is going to make a bogus claim - like those in the cult do ALL the time - I am going to speak up.

 

 

 

 

Expand  

Have you noticed how unhinged you’re getting? Go outside and get some air. 

  • Eyeroll 1
  • Agree 3
Posted
  On 5/7/2022 at 12:38 AM, BillStime said:


No no no no no no no no no - that’s not how this works.

 

YOU MADE THE CLAIM

YOU BACK IT UP

 

PS: I could give two shitz who leaked it AND I am not trying to protect anyone but if someone is going to make a bogus claim - like those in the cult do ALL the time - I am going to speak up.

 

 

 

 

Expand  

My claim is she could be the leak, yours is she can't be. I made no definite claim, you did. You are doing the same as the news reporter you are attacking, making claims as definite without any real evidence. I do care who leaked it and will state that whoever did it should be charged with whatever crime it could be.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted (edited)
  On 5/7/2022 at 1:00 AM, Buffalo Timmy said:

My claim is she could be the leak, yours is she can't be. I made no definite claim, you did. You are doing the same as the news reporter you are attacking, making claims as definite without any real evidence. I do care who leaked it and will state that whoever did it should be charged with whatever crime it could be.

Expand  

 

No, your claim NEVER contained the word COULD.  Here is your claim:

 

  On 5/6/2022 at 12:00 AM, Buffalo Timmy said:

she has access to the building and intranet where the memo was made

Expand  

 

You just assumed that she had access because someone 41 years ago was able to join the court immediately.

 

Take the L

 

 

Edited by BillStime
Posted
  On 5/7/2022 at 1:06 AM, BillStime said:

 

No, your claim NEVER contained the word COULD.  Here is your claim:

 

 

You just assumed that she had access because someone 41 years ago was able to join the court immediately.

 

Take the L

 

 

Expand  

You have provided no evidence I am wrong, are you really such a loser that unless I have 20 documented ways you are wrong that is a win for you? As I stated show me evidence that things have changed and I will believe it 

Posted
  On 5/7/2022 at 11:18 AM, Buffalo Timmy said:

You have provided no evidence I am wrong, are you really such a loser that unless I have 20 documented ways you are wrong that is a win for you? As I stated show me evidence that things have changed and I will believe it 

Expand  


The onus is on you - man up.

 

I provided you with MORE than enough to go on to discredit you.

 

Take the L

Posted
  On 5/7/2022 at 12:20 PM, BillStime said:


Hilarious - Sandra Day - She was your go to example and that TOO backfired in your face ~ 😆

 

Back up your claim, teacher 

Expand  

I will end it here- you admit I have evidence- admittedly older evidence but you have none. So thank you for admitting it and unless you want to present something I am moving on.

×
×
  • Create New...