Brett Kavanaugh, Rachel Mitchell and Republican's "Dirty-Tricks" Report
Comments
-
This White House is "not to be trusted no more than one can throw a stick at". The sham FBI investigation was done to support the Boy-Federal Appeal's Judge (Brett Kavanaugh). The "Con-man" President struck again, misleading the people about and opened and free investigation. The Truth will prevail. He will be brought down. His fall will be hard. CM
-
@reformed said:
Her report was accurate and spot on.What was her report's assessment of Judge Kavanaugh's testimony, the judge being the other witness she and the committee heard from?
-
C_M_'s posts are a "sham." "Not to be trusted no more than one can throw a stick at."
"Con-man" C_M_ strikes again and again in his posts. C_M_ is "Misleading the people."
"The Truth will prevail. [C_M_] will be brought down. His fall will be hard."
-
@GaoLu said:
C_M_'s posts are a "sham." "Not to be trusted no more than one can throw a stick at.""Con-man" C_M_ strikes again and again in his posts. C_M_ is "Misleading the people."
"The Truth will prevail. [C_M_] will be brought down. His fall will be hard."
GaoLu,
Why you are so worried about my posts, if they are, what you say, what they are? Do you respect fellow users of CD? It appears that any user other than GaoLu doesn't have the intellect, ability, common sense, or the discernment to read and think for themselves. Are you saying this with your post above? Why do you seem to have such low regards for other adult users of CD?
What are you so afraid of? It's alright to be upset, ashame and disappointed with Kavanaugh, Mitchell, and the FBI investigation. They are all under the influence of a con-man-in-Chief who unfortunately the President of the US.
I appreciate so much more the GaoLu that's original who are unusually sober-minded and avoid pettiness. I know fear and disappointment can drive a man to be less than insightful. A thing that is considered worthless shouldn't take up so much of a person's attention or his time. I wonder if one is being truthful about what is important and influential?
May I suggest, GaoLu, you start (since you're wouldn't use PM) a gripe thread and regurgitate all of your unkind bile about me there. This will give others and silent reader a chance to move with the thread's discussion. Also, you can hyperlink those interested in it. This should put a smile on your face. Please consider this for the sake of all. I think you owe it to Jan for all the work he put into getting CD running again. A good night rest, you will feel better.
CM -
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Her report was accurate and spot on.What was her report's assessment of Judge Kavanaugh's testimony, the judge being the other witness she and the committee heard from?
The report wasn't about him Bill. He wasn't the one making accusations.
@C_M_ said:
@GaoLu said:
C_M_'s posts are a "sham." "Not to be trusted no more than one can throw a stick at.""Con-man" C_M_ strikes again and again in his posts. C_M_ is "Misleading the people."
"The Truth will prevail. [C_M_] will be brought down. His fall will be hard."
GaoLu,
Why you are so worried about my posts, if they are, what you say, what they are? Do you respect fellow users of CD? It appears that any user other than GaoLu doesn't have the intellect, ability, common sense, or the discernment to read and think for themselves. Are you saying this with your post above? Why do you seem to have such low regards for other adult users of CD?
What are you so afraid of? It's alright to be upset, ashame and disappointed with Kavanaugh, Mitchell, and the FBI investigation. They are all under the influence of a con-man-in-Chief who unfortunately the President of the US.
I appreciate so much more the GaoLu that's original who are unusually sober-minded and avoid pettiness. I know fear and disappointment can drive a man to be less than insightful. A thing that is considered worthless shouldn't take up so much of a person's attention or his time. I wonder if one is being truthful about what is important and influential?
May I suggest, GaoLu, you start (since you're wouldn't use PM) a gripe thread and regurgitate all of your unkind bile about me there. This will give others and silent reader a chance to move with the thread's discussion. Also, you can hyperlink those interested in it. This should put a smile on your face. Please consider this for the sake of all. I think you owe it to Jan for all the work he put into getting CD running again. A good night rest, you will feel better.
CMThe expectation is that you criticize ideas not people. Where is the outcry from @Bill_Coley on this one?
-
@reformed said:
The report wasn't about him Bill. He wasn't the one making accusations.
In the header of her memo, attorney Mitchell declares her subject to be an "Analysis of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s Allegations." A report that claims to analyze the allegations of an accuser, but makes no mention of the under oath responses of the accused in some way(s) might qualify, as you describe Mitchell's report, as "accurate and spot on" - though the reviews of her work from prosecutors not affiliated with the case suggest othewise - but it's certainly not thorough or judicious.
The expectation is that you criticize ideas not people. Where is the outcry from @Bill_Coley on this one?
And yet AGAIN you bring me into one of your disputes, reformed. Granted, this time the reference is not the direct invitation you offered previously....
"Ad Hominem @Bill_Coley correct? Are you going to call this one out?"
... but it's within shouting distance of an invitation.
The problem is I learned a vital and necessary lesson from my acceptance of your previous invitation: Don't accept your invitations.
Not far into our exchange in this thread, which began BECAUSE YOU INVITED ME INTO THIS THREAD, you began criticizing the content of my posts in this thread. In response to your critiques - many of which brimmed with cogent, nuanced sophistication such as this...
"You are not our mother or even our Father and quite frankly you are self-righteous, and holier than thou when it comes to conduct on these forums even if it is hypocritical."
... IN FOUR DIFFERENT POSTS I called to your attention the fact that YOU had invited me into this thread, that I had commented here because you had asked me to comment here. Why four posts, not just one? Because you never even acknowledged, let alone responded to, ANY of those reminders of your actions. Translation: You refused to stand accountable for your role in my presence in this thread.
Long story short: I won't be accepting your invitations to join or comment on your disputes with other CD posters until I am satisfied that you've become willing to take responsibility for your actions.
Long story shorter: I won't be accepting any of your invitations.
-
> @C_M_ said:
> @GaoLu said:
> C_M_'s posts are a "sham." "Not to be trusted no more than one can throw a stick at."
>
> "Con-man" C_M_ strikes again and again in his posts. C_M_ is "Misleading the people."
>
> "The Truth will prevail. [C_M_] will be brought down. His fall will be hard."
>
>
>
>
>
> GaoLu,
>
> Why you are so worried about my posts, if they are, what you say, what they are? Do you respect fellow users of CD? It appears that any user other than GaoLu doesn't have the intellect, ability, common sense, or the discernment to read and think for themselves. Are you saying this with your post above? Why do you seem to have such low regards for other adult users of CD?
>
> What are you so afraid of? It's alright to be upset, ashame and disappointed with Kavanaugh, Mitchell, and the FBI investigation. They are all under the influence of a con-man-in-Chief who unfortunately the President of the US.
>
> I appreciate so much more the GaoLu that's original who are unusually sober-minded and avoid pettiness. I know fear and disappointment can drive a man to be less than insightful. A thing that is considered worthless shouldn't take up so much of a person's attention or his time. I wonder if one is being truthful about what is important and influential?
>
> May I suggest, GaoLu, you start (since you're wouldn't use PM) a gripe thread and regurgitate all of your unkind bile about me there. This will give others and silent reader a chance to move with the thread's discussion. Also, you can hyperlink those interested in it. This should put a smile on your face. Please consider this for the sake of all. I think you owe it to Jan for all the work he put into getting CD running again. A good night rest, you will feel better. CM
Oh dear. You are in dreadful distress and anguish—pain from the gall of unmitigated bitterness. My sympathy. Let me offer an olive branch so you can feel peace.
First, I am very grateful for your posts. Here is why.
My primary training is in science and secondary is in theology. I am fascinated by how people think, especially the subset of neo-liberals who claim to identify as a sort of “trans-Christian.”
I find you to be much like a lemon. Just a light squeeze and all the sour/ bitter insides come gushing out. This ts the best chance I’ve ever had to learn about the behavior and inner workings and content of such people. You and Bill certainly provide statistically significant data points along with disturbing and informative anecdotal narratives. Fascinating. I learn more every day. For all that I am indebted and thank you. That is a gift we can each give to each other. Again, thank you.
Dave is a different bird. He doesn’t even go to church. Can’t seem to find a soul on earth he can get along well enough to have a friendship. He slings a broad smorgasbord of unorthodoxy around without rhyme or reason, that is both horrifying and amusing, yet I hope fairly harmless.
Wolfgang is honest and struggles to make sense of the Trinity and has sort of washed out on the idea. Yet I admire him—conspiracy theories and all. He seems honest and good and loves God, people and the Bible. Most everyone else (other than the array of reduculoud aliases that formerly surfaced), I hold in deep respect. Some of the former denizens of CD and I are still in occasional contact and value those friendships.
So, that is pretty much everyone here, all of whom I deeply respect.
Bill / C_M_, Siamese twins, well, frankly I find obscene, dishonest, the embodiment of biblically-defined foolishness. Nevertheless, we learn much by taking a few minutes now and then to gawk at counterfeits, fold and spindle them to watch them flake and peel, squeeze them a titch, just enough to see the bitter juice and seeds squirt out. In so doing we both learn something valuable. -
@reformed said:
The expectation is that you criticize ideas not people. Where is the outcry from @Bill_Coley on this one?
Reformed, unlike you, I didn't invite Bill to make remarks in this post exchange. Let me hasten to say, I can't stop him from exercising his privilege given to all CD Users, to leave a comment.
I was responding to and addressing, GaoLu. the name Reformed contains more letters. In my quest to address Gaolu, I was making suggestions to break the seeming restless fever of discontent and yet, making the forums pleasant for others to use. You call it helping, Reformed.
Don't you want others to join CD? Or do you have a hidden mission to destroy it?
PS. "No man for any considerable period can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true". -- Nathaniel Hawthorne
Post edited by C Mc on -
@C_M_ said:
Don't you want others to join CD? Or do you have a hidden mission to destroy it?PS. "No man for any considerable period can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true". -- Nathaniel Hawthorne
See the post above yours and smell the coffee--maybe dip your nose in it. I can repost it if your memory is short.
-
@GaoLu said: "...You are in dreadful distress and anguish—pain from the gall of unmitigated bitterness. My sympathy. Let me offer an olive branch so you can feel peace.
Is this coded language and cry for your own internal experiences? It sounds like a sad man with no friends. GaoLu, God is your Friend, even if you think others are not. You are not alone. Try focusing on the OP of this thread and not on the people who contribute to it.
Oh, GaoLu, is it a violation of the forum rules if I substitute two other CD user's name in your statement below?
@GaoLu said: "_______/ _______, Siamese twins, well, frankly I find obscene, dishonest, the embodiment of biblically-defined foolishness. Nevertheless, we learn much by taking a few minutes now and then to gawk at counterfeits, fold and spindle them to watch them flake and peel, squeeze them a titch, just enough to see the bitter juice and seeds squirt out. In so doing we both learn something valuable.
Would you enjoy your name and another plugged in above (true or false)? It's easier to love than to hate. CM
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
The report wasn't about him Bill. He wasn't the one making accusations.
In the header of her memo, attorney Mitchell declares her subject to be an "Analysis of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s Allegations." A report that claims to analyze the allegations of an accuser, but makes no mention of the under oath responses of the accused in some way(s) might qualify, as you describe Mitchell's report, as "accurate and spot on" - though the reviews of her work from prosecutors not affiliated with the case suggest othewise - but it's certainly not thorough or judicious.
Bill, the purpose was not to analyze Kavanaugh, it was to analyze the validity of her claims. They aren't valid from a prosecutors standpoint. They would never be brought to trial. That's the point.
The expectation is that you criticize ideas not people. Where is the outcry from @Bill_Coley on this one?
And yet AGAIN you bring me into one of your disputes, reformed. Granted, this time the reference is not the direct invitation you offered previously....
"Ad Hominem @Bill_Coley correct? Are you going to call this one out?"
... but it's within shouting distance of an invitation.
The problem is I learned a vital and necessary lesson from my acceptance of your previous invitation: Don't accept your invitations.
Just want to make sure you aren't a hypocrite and consistent in your annoying habits of forum police.
Not far into our exchange in this thread, which began BECAUSE YOU INVITED ME INTO THIS THREAD, you began criticizing the content of my posts in this thread. In response to your critiques - many of which brimmed with cogent, nuanced sophistication such as this...
"You are not our mother or even our Father and quite frankly you are self-righteous, and holier than thou when it comes to conduct on these forums even if it is hypocritical."
... IN FOUR DIFFERENT POSTS I called to your attention the fact that YOU had invited me into this thread, that I had commented here because you had asked me to comment here. Why four posts, not just one? Because you never even acknowledged, let alone responded to, ANY of those reminders of your actions. Translation: You refused to stand accountable for your role in my presence in this thread.
Long story short: I won't be accepting your invitations to join or comment on your disputes with other CD posters until I am satisfied that you've become willing to take responsibility for your actions.
Long story shorter: I won't be accepting any of your invitations.
Awww Bill is growing up. But let's see if it is true growing up to follow the board expectations or if it is only when it is convenient for him.
@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
The expectation is that you criticize ideas not people. Where is the outcry from @Bill_Coley on this one?
Reformed, unlike you, I didn't invite Bill to make remarks in this post exchange. Let me hasten to say, I can't stop him from exercising his privilege given to all CD Users, to leave a comment.
I was responding to and addressing, GaoLu. the name Reformed contains more letters. In my quest to address Gaolu, I was making suggestions to break the seeming restless fever of discontent and yet, making the forums pleasant for others to use. You call it helping, Reformed.
Don't you want others to join CD? Or do you have a hidden mission to destroy it?
PS. "No man for any considerable period can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true". -- Nathaniel Hawthorne
If anyone keeps people away from here it is you.
-
@reformed said:
If anyone keeps people away from here it is you.
You know this is NOT true and you don't believe this. Only you and (maybe) one other, believes this. Besides, this thread is not about me. I suggested you and one other start a new thread and state all you have against me. This will keep you (and one other) from exposing yourselves, your dark-side, and meanness. So, now, who's keeping others from joining? What you're doing is helping?
I challenge you, or anyone here, with the approval of Jan, to start a new thread, make your case by each (known users) make public comments and take a public vote to have me removed. No surrogates or "throwing the brick and hiding the hand". The comments should cite the following:
- The established written rules.
- Examples of infractions.
- Identify by examples hinderances to people joining during the time of the new CD.
- What legitimate public infractions and admonishments were given over a select period of time.
- State specifically under whose authority you evaluated and admonished.
Let's settle it once and for all. I will remove myself as desired by public comments and votes when all is recorded on a new single thread. So, let's put up or remain silent on the matter.
Let's enjoy the privileges offered. Let's not forget, all posts (past, present, and future) contain some facts, predictions, projections and/or opinions. Especially, when it comes to "News & Current Events". Sincerely, CM
PS. Please, no more comments about this here. You know what to do if it's personal. Comments on the OP are welcome. CM
-
You can do as you choose C_M_. No one here is your mother or voting for you to leave. We aren't crying to Jan. On the other hand, if you/Bill were not here, the forum might have a chance of becoming something. If...you don't just come back with some new alias.
While you sometimes offer good thoughts (thanks!), your posts generally are exceedingly negative and offensive, mocking and scornful. I agree with Reformed that "If anyone keeps people away from here it is you."
-
@GaoLu said:
You can do as you choose C_M_. No one here is your mother or voting for you to leave. We aren't crying to Jan. On the other hand, if you/Bill were not here, the forum might have a chance of becoming something. If...you don't just come back with some new alias.While you sometimes offer good thoughts (thanks!), your posts generally are exceedingly negative and offensive, mocking and scornful. I agree with Reformed that "If anyone keeps people away from here it is you."
Why can't we have the minimalist of cooperation? "You can't have your cake and eat it too". CM
@C_M_ said: PS. Please, no more comments about this here. You know what to do if it's personal. Comments on the OP are welcome. CM
-
Read your own post. It contradicts everything in itself.
-
Brett Kavanaugh, Rachel Mitchell, and Republican's "Dirty-Tricks" Report come to a head tomorrow. It's not over until its over.
CM -
@C_M_ said:
Brett Kavanaugh, Rachel Mitchell, and Republican's "Dirty-Tricks" Report come to a head tomorrow. It's not over until its over. CMWhat dirty tricks? Democrats are the ones with dirty tricks in this case.
-
@GaoLu said:
You can do as you choose C_M_. No one here is your mother or voting for you to leave. We aren't crying to Jan. On the other hand, if you/Bill were not here, the forum might have a chance of becoming something. If...you don't just come back with some new alias.Gao Lu, every time I think and hope you've finally subdued your urges to lie pathologically about the matter of other CD participants' - particularly my - creating alias IDs, my hopes are cruelly dashed by the appearance of yet another post in which by insinuation or direct reference you suggest, falsely, that I (or in this case, CM) have created and continue to create alias IDs.
Though there is no reason for me or any other CD poster to believe it will make any constructive difference, I repeat what I have told you in at least two previous posts:
- When you claim that I have created alias CD identities, you’re lying.
- When you speculate or insinuate that CM and I are one in the same person, products of the same identity creator, you’re lying.
- When in the previous edition of CD forums you insinuated that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity of my creation, you lied.
- When in the previous edition of the CD forums you insinuated that I had created CD identities for “Brad Dickey,” “Penny Lane,” and “Connor Pierson,” you lied... every time.
- When in THIS POST on August 14 you acknowledged ONLY that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity that I “probably” did not create, you lied.
- When in THIS POST on September 28, after a nearly two week recent silence on the issue of identity aliases, you chose to raise the issue again, albeit in a creative manner, you lied again.
By my count, this is your 21st post since August 9 on the subject of your tin foil hat conspiracy theory regarding CD aliases, every one of them rooted in a lie.
You are a pathological liar, Gao Lu. NOT on all things. NOT on most things. ONLY on THIS thing: For reasons unknown to me, you are incapable of stopping your lying about me (and CM, I gather) and CD alias identities. And for that reason, I am unwilling to stop issuing to you this plea: Please stop lying about my (and CM's, I gather) CD identity.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@GaoLu said:
You can do as you choose C_M_. No one here is your mother or voting for you to leave. We aren't crying to Jan. On the other hand, if you/Bill were not here, the forum might have a chance of becoming something. If...you don't just come back with some new alias.Gao Lu, every time I think and hope you've finally subdued your urges to lie pathologically about the matter of other CD participants' - particularly my - creating alias IDs, my hopes are cruelly dashed by the appearance of yet another post in which by insinuation or direct reference you suggest, falsely, that I (or in this case, CM) have created and continue to create alias IDs.
Though there is no reason for me or any other CD poster to believe it will make any constructive difference, I repeat what I have told you in at least two previous posts:
- When you claim that I have created alias CD identities, you’re lying.
- When you speculate or insinuate that CM and I are one in the same person, products of the same identity creator, you’re lying.
- When in the previous edition of CD forums you insinuated that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity of my creation, you lied.
- When in the previous edition of the CD forums you insinuated that I had created CD identities for “Brad Dickey,” “Penny Lane,” and “Connor Pierson,” you lied... every time.
- When in THIS POST on August 14 you acknowledged ONLY that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity that I “probably” did not create, you lied.
- When in THIS POST on September 28, after a nearly two week recent silence on the issue of identity aliases, you chose to raise the issue again, albeit in a creative manner, you lied again.
By my count, this is your 21st post since August 9 on the subject of your tin foil hat conspiracy theory regarding CD aliases, every one of them rooted in a lie.
You are a pathological liar, Gao Lu. NOT on all things. NOT on most things. ONLY on THIS thing: For reasons unknown to me, you are incapable of stopping your lying about me (and CM, I gather) and CD alias identities. And for that reason, I am unwilling to stop issuing to you this plea: Please stop lying about my (and CM's, I gather) CD identity.
Ah Ah Ah @Bill_Coley , remember to criticize ideas, not people. You have broken the expectation and called @GaoLu a pathological liar. That's not an idea you are criticizing there. You are criticizing @GaoLu directly. You also criticize him of being incapable of stopping his lies (which I don't think are lies by definition but whatever that's another argument another day). That's not criticizing ideas, that is criticizing him.
So yes, here is your quote you have been asking for for so long. You break the expectations. Get off your self-righteous high horse.
-
@reformed said:
Ah Ah Ah @Bill_Coley , remember to criticize ideas, not people. You have broken the expectation and called @GaoLu a pathological liar. That's not an idea you are criticizing there. You are criticizing @GaoLu directly. You also criticize him of being incapable of stopping his lies (which I don't think are lies by definition but whatever that's another argument another day). That's not criticizing ideas, that is criticizing him.
So yes, here is your quote you have been asking for for so long. You break the expectations. Get off your self-righteous high horse.
As I said in another post, reformed, I will no longer accept your invitations into your disputes with other CD posters... not even if the dispute into which you invite me is with my approach to handling my disputes with other CD posters.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Ah Ah Ah @Bill_Coley , remember to criticize ideas, not people. You have broken the expectation and called @GaoLu a pathological liar. That's not an idea you are criticizing there. You are criticizing @GaoLu directly. You also criticize him of being incapable of stopping his lies (which I don't think are lies by definition but whatever that's another argument another day). That's not criticizing ideas, that is criticizing him.
So yes, here is your quote you have been asking for for so long. You break the expectations. Get off your self-righteous high horse.
As I said in another post, reformed, I will no longer accept your invitations into your disputes with other CD posters... not even if the dispute into which you invite me is with my approach to handling my disputes with other CD posters.
I'm not inviting you to anything. I pointed out you just broke the thing you tout so highly against others. It was pretty glaring even. It is for all to see. You have been caught in a lie that you don't break the expectations.
The funny thing is this. You dodged by saying you weren't going to accept my invitation. I wasn't inviting you to anything. Feeling guilty?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@GaoLu said:
You can do as you choose C_M_. No one here is your mother or voting for you to leave. We aren't crying to Jan. On the other hand, if you/Bill were not here, the forum might have a chance of becoming something. If...you don't just come back with some new alias.Gao Lu, every time I think and hope you've finally subdued your urges to lie pathologically about the matter of other CD participants' - particularly my - creating alias IDs, my hopes are cruelly dashed by the appearance of yet another post in which by insinuation or direct reference you suggest, falsely, that I (or in this case, CM) have created and continue to create alias IDs.
I am pretty sure I have only said that you and C_M_ APPEAR to be doing so. I have no proof. Not even an internet link. Not even a NYT Op-Ed piece. We have only a lot of glaring evidence. I am no more sure you are making aliases than I am that Ford was lying about Kavanaugh. The possibility is high, which I have and probably will occasionally point out when it seems interesting to do so. Whether or not you actually use aliases and how many really doesn't matter to me, but is a curiosity. Go ahead and use them if you wish.
That may still dash your hopes to hide using multiple aliases. You do your thing, I'll do mine. We can all get along.
Though there is no reason for me or any other CD poster to believe it will make any constructive difference, I repeat what I have told you in at least two previous posts:
- When you claim that I have created alias CD identities, you’re lying.
- I am pretty sure I have not made that claim. You are lying and falsely accusing by saying so.
- Prove it.
- When you speculate or insinuate that CM and I are one in the same person, products of the same identity creator, you’re lying.
What is your definition of lying? What do you call your speculating and insinuating about anything and everyone? If you think I am lying by insinuation, then you must think lying is just fine as you live by that bread alone.
If not, prove it.
- When in the previous edition of CD forums you insinuated that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity of my creation, you lied.
- You are redefining terms--insinuation as lying. Nothing new there. You have always done that. I consider that intentional lying because you know better and twist truth deliberately.
- I never thought Wolfgang was your alias. Briefly, I considered the possibility because you both disappeared for almost exactly the same time, but that was likely a coincidence. I don't think Wolfgang is your alias. I have a lot of respect for Wolfgang and have enjoyed many of his posts. Wolfgang can tell you we have even had some cheerful PM's particularly regarding my families interest in his work with service dogs.
- When in the previous edition of the CD forums you insinuated that I had created CD identities for “Brad Dickey,” “Penny Lane,” and “Connor Pierson,” you lied... every time.
Prove it. I don't know about the identities of those and other identities that were absurd. I have no proof, never said I did, and don't really have an interest in proving one way or the other. Years ago, I raised the possibility they could be you for good reason which was indicated. I still think that is likely. If not, then you can sleep at night.
Based on that you call me a liar. That is between you and God, but I don't own it.
Whether or not those were your aliases, your record and character displayed here gives me little reason to believe you.
- When in THIS POST on August 14 you acknowledged ONLY that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity that I “probably” did not create, you lied.
- When in THIS POST on September 28, after a nearly two-week recent silence on the issue of identity aliases, you chose to raise the issue again, albeit in a creative manner, you lied again.
And I will likely raise it again. Your hyper-reaction to the possibility is certainly noteworthy.
By my count, this is your 21st post since August 9 on the subject of your tin foil hat conspiracy theory regarding CD aliases, every one of them rooted in a lie.
In whose lie is it rooted is indeed interesting.
You are a pathological liar, Gao Lu. NOT on all things. NOT on most things. ONLY on THIS thing: For reasons unknown to me, you are incapable of stopping your lying about me (and CM, I gather) and CD alias identities. And for that reason, I am unwilling to stop issuing to you this plea: Please stop lying about my (and CM's, I gather) CD identity.
Tut tut, big boy. Remember to criticize ideas and not people--that is your line and a good one.
Keep issuing your plea. It is most self-incriminating and saves me time pointing out the possibility which is all too real.
-
@GaoLu said:
@Bill_Coley said:
@GaoLu said:
You can do as you choose C_M_. No one here is your mother or voting for you to leave. We aren't crying to Jan. On the other hand, if you/Bill were not here, the forum might have a chance of becoming something. If...you don't just come back with some new alias.Gao Lu, every time I think and hope you've finally subdued your urges to lie pathologically about the matter of other CD participants' - particularly my - creating alias IDs, my hopes are cruelly dashed by the appearance of yet another post in which by insinuation or direct reference you suggest, falsely, that I (or in this case, CM) have created and continue to create alias IDs.
I am pretty sure I have only said that you and C_M_ APPEAR to be doing so. I have no proof. Not even an internet link. Not even a NYT Op-Ed piece. We have only a lot of glaring evidence. I am no more sure you are making aliases than I am that Ford was lying about Kavanaugh. The possibility is high, which I have and probably will occasionally point out when it seems interesting to do so. Whether or not you actually use aliases and how many really doesn't matter to me, but is a curiosity. Go ahead and use them if you wish.
That may still dash your hopes to hide using multiple aliases. You do your thing, I'll do mine. We can all get along.
Though there is no reason for me or any other CD poster to believe it will make any constructive difference, I repeat what I have told you in at least two previous posts:
- When you claim that I have created alias CD identities, you’re lying.
- I am pretty sure I have not made that claim. You are lying and falsely accusing by saying so.
- Prove it.
- When you speculate or insinuate that CM and I are one in the same person, products of the same identity creator, you’re lying.
What is your definition of lying? What do you call your speculating and insinuating about anything and everyone? If you think I am lying by insinuation, then you must think lying is just fine as you live by that bread alone.
If not, prove it.
- When in the previous edition of CD forums you insinuated that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity of my creation, you lied.
- You are redefining terms--insinuation as lying. Nothing new there. You have always done that. I consider that intentional lying because you know better and twist truth deliberately.
- I never thought Wolfgang was your alias. Briefly, I considered the possibility because you both disappeared for almost exactly the same time, but that was likely a coincidence. I don't think Wolfgang is your alias. I have a lot of respect for Wolfgang and have enjoyed many of his posts. Wolfgang can tell you we have even had some cheerful PM's particularly regarding my families interest in his work with service dogs.
- When in the previous edition of the CD forums you insinuated that I had created CD identities for “Brad Dickey,” “Penny Lane,” and “Connor Pierson,” you lied... every time.
Prove it. I don't know about the identities of those and other identities that were absurd. I have no proof, never said I did, and don't really have an interest in proving one way or the other. Years ago, I raised the possibility they could be you for good reason which was indicated. I still think that is likely. If not, then you can sleep at night.
Based on that you call me a liar. That is between you and God, but I don't own it.
Whether or not those were your aliases, your record and character displayed here gives me little reason to believe you.
- When in THIS POST on August 14 you acknowledged ONLY that Wolfgang’s was a CD identity that I “probably” did not create, you lied.
- When in THIS POST on September 28, after a nearly two-week recent silence on the issue of identity aliases, you chose to raise the issue again, albeit in a creative manner, you lied again.
And I will likely raise it again. Your hyper-reaction to the possibility is certainly noteworthy.
By my count, this is your 21st post since August 9 on the subject of your tin foil hat conspiracy theory regarding CD aliases, every one of them rooted in a lie.
In whose lie is it rooted is indeed interesting.
You are a pathological liar, Gao Lu. NOT on all things. NOT on most things. ONLY on THIS thing: For reasons unknown to me, you are incapable of stopping your lying about me (and CM, I gather) and CD alias identities. And for that reason, I am unwilling to stop issuing to you this plea: Please stop lying about my (and CM's, I gather) CD identity.
Tut tut, big boy. Remember to criticize ideas and not people--that is your line and a good one.
Keep issuing your plea. It is most self-incriminating and saves me time pointing out the possibility which is all too real.
Remember, Democrats/Liberals accuse of what they do themselves. Look at Cory Booker in the Kavanaugh case.
-
@GaoLu said:
By my count, this is the 22nd post since August 9 in which by insinuation or direct reference you have raised your tin foil hat conspiracy about me and alias CD identities. In this latest creation, I count at least five suggestions and/or insinuations that add to your history of lying.
Every time you post a suggestion, a hint, an insinuation, an outright claim, a suggestion that there is "glaring evidence," that "the possibility is high," or that your years-old lie about my alleged aliases in the previous edition of CD, you lie.
Please stop lying about my CD identity.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@GaoLu said:
By my count, this is the 22nd post since August 9 in which by insinuation or direct reference you have raised your tin foil hat conspiracy about me and alias CD identities. In this latest creation, I count at least five suggestions and/or insinuations that add to your history of lying.
Every time you post a suggestion, a hint, an insinuation, an outright claim, a suggestion that there is "glaring evidence," that "the possibility is high," or that your years-old lie about my alleged aliases in the previous edition of CD, you lie.
Please stop lying about my CD identity.
Criticize ideas, not people.
-
@reformed said:
I'm not inviting you to anything. I pointed out you just broke the thing you tout so highly against others. It was pretty glaring even. It is for all to see. You have been caught in a lie that you don't break the expectations.
The funny thing is this. You dodged by saying you weren't going to accept my invitation. I wasn't inviting you to anything. Feeling guilty?
No.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
I'm not inviting you to anything. I pointed out you just broke the thing you tout so highly against others. It was pretty glaring even. It is for all to see. You have been caught in a lie that you don't break the expectations.
The funny thing is this. You dodged by saying you weren't going to accept my invitation. I wasn't inviting you to anything. Feeling guilty?
No.
Well, you should but I guess that is typical. Liberal double standard. You are above the law I guess.
-
@reformed said:
"Criticize ideas, not people".
Reformed,
That's only an unwritten, rule effective when everyone agrees to it. Playing the same game, in the same field, at the same time, with different rules, someone will definitely get hurt. Besides, not all criticism is bad. So, let's get real in understanding the rules of CD's posting road.In addition, are there not an exception to every rule, but not principles? CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
"Criticize ideas, not people".
Reformed,
That's only an unwritten, rule effective when everyone agrees to it. Playing the same game, in the same field, at the same time, with different rules, someone will definitely get hurt. Besides, not all criticism is bad. So, let's get real in understanding the rules of CD's posting road.In addition, are there not an exception to every rule, but not principles? CM
@GaoLu see? They really do have double standards.
-
Either that or none.
