“So now you’re trying the Adam Schiff tactic of just making up lies and putting them in someone’s else’s mouth because you don’t have the evidence that you claimed to have?”
I’ll admit the quotes are not actual. But I’ve given you endless opportunities to denounce your support of the Clintons and Podestas, and for some odd reason you just keep defending them.
There is a big difference between skepticism and cynicism.
You did not come on this thread saying you are unconvinced of their involvement with these particular crimes. Instead, you came here mocking the evidence and falling for the disinformation campaign trying to make out the wikileaks evidence as just some kooky conspiracy theory. You mocked those who have been through the kinds of abuse under discussion.
A person who has mocked a victim of human trafficking deserves to be endlessly and ruthlessly mocked and have his reputation destroyed.
“I’ll admit the quotes are not actual.”
Right, and “not actual” quotes are called “lies”.
“Instead, you came here mocking the evidence...”
What evidence? You still won’t show this supposed evidence.
Where are the emails that say what you claimed they say?
“A person who has mocked a victim of human trafficking...”
You’re talking about me calling Cathy O’Brien a lunatic? Well, I was actually being charitable to her, since the alternative is that she is just a liar. If she knows what she is saying is BS, she’s a liar, if she actually believes it, she’s a lunatic. That’s not “mockery”, it’s just an honest assessment.
Now, as for calling her a “victim of human trafficking”, who has been convicted of “trafficking” her? Are we supposed to all just “believe the victim” like the MeToo movement says?
Why should we believe her and not, say, Christine Blasey Ford?