Replies

I have decided that, contrary to your insinuation, you are not neutral and basing your opinions on facts.

In post 298 I refuted GE's lie that he exposed me in this issue and in the processes exposed his libel (calling me a liar for claiming I gave up the answer myself)

In post 298 I uncovered two of GE's lies in this very thread about that Clinton thread.

In post 298 I exposed GE for taking things out of context in order to paint a false picture of my comments.

I did this in post 298 with direct links to all of the involved posts proving my point, and even posted my entire earlier post in context to show how GE distorts things. This is all absolutely irrefutable with logical argument.

However, I notice that while both of you have found time to comment multiple times since then, over five hours ago, neither of you have dared to reply to that post.

GE, you didn't reply because it puts your lies, libel and distortions right up there for everyone to see. You have no logical counter to that post.

for-q, I believe you didn't reply because it destroys your ostensible argument for believing GE and not me. How can you continue the charade of being disinterested when you support one who runs from his proven lies over one who admitted and explained? You can't. You are not disinterested. You are biased.