Posted on 06/14/2005 8:10:30 AM PDT by franksolich
Well, due to the pressures of time, one forgets.
I had even forgotten that the much-maligned Bev Harris had first been contacted by me.....long after the DUmmie FUnnies were on this case, even though the Andyites continue to blame innocent her.....and I was thinking I had contacted a "Johnny Gannon" or "Jeff Goetsch," but couldn't remember, until I checked the replies.
Wheels keep spinning and spinning and spinning in that debate.
So the guy says the round red one would make us look like fools if he provided the evidence (answers to the three questions).
Hey, why wouldn't the round red one jump at the chance to make us look like fools? What's holding him up?
I wonder why they even post to the document. If they aren't going to attempt to 'clear' Andy, what is the point of posting to the thread?
Yeah, that really gets me.
They're not answering the questions.
If they answered the questions, we here would look like utter abject fools.
And surely they wish us to look like utter abject fools.
So why aren't they answering the questions?
Surely it is not out of human decency and civility (i.e., that they don't want us to look bad)--surely it must be something else.
Well spits-up-on-chest has now said that proof may well be offered in a counter suit. This should get interesting now. Here come the posts about 'bring it on... I want discovery'.
It's hilarious.
The guy says "counter suit."
Okay.
In order to have a "counter suit," one first needs a "suit."
Okay.
So who is suing, so they can sue back?
It would be interesting to know how many 'hits' that thread got. Hope AA gives a heads up on the number of 'signatures' he collects before sending this off.
Well, he's gotten plenty of signatures from liberals, leftists, progressives, Democrats, honest authentic sincere members of democraticunderground, but the more the better.
Why did this discussion remind me of a round red one chasing his rear end around a tree?
For some reason--and I don't know--it reminded me of that.
Because any attempt to get answers from the FOA always ends up with the FOA avoidance of the issue and denigrates to deflections just like the principle and goodboy posts at CU.
It really reminds me of a prize fight with one fighter standing in center ring, gloves up, ready to fight it out, and the other sitting on his stool in his corner shouting obscenities at his opponent, but refusing to come out of his corner.
bookmark.. gotta run the monthly tax donations over to the bank
Are you still watching the malloy site? Goodboy has now appeared. He says he has turned over 1000 posts from Scamdy, FR and CU to who, I don't know. Post attacking the Andyites. Now I'm worried :)
Pretty fricken sad.
No, make that very fricken sad.
It's the painful convolutions and contortions of the cover-up that really say "Here goeth a FRAUD."
To whom did richboy turn over the comments?
The "David Letterman" or "Jay Leno" show, perhaps?
Do you know how many e-mail 'signatures' scamdy.com received for their FBI report?
I'm told it will be reported at the conclusion, about six days from now; but I do know a lot of people have signed.
And a gentle reminder--although this complaint has not yet been filed, five other complaints have been filed since the middle of last week.
Wow--kinda weird to see that even Mike Malloy's Website is questioning ole Scamdy even after having that sweet little interview with him awhile ago! This just keeps growing bigger and bigger!.....except, haven't heard any of it on the MSM yet!
You know, that was actually one of the best debates this side--the side demanding accountability--has had, and should serve as a "guide" for everyone else.
An attorney friend of mine--this is a small place; everybody knows everybody else, and is a friend of everybody else--has been watching this unfold, and he has had a constant complaint about this side, the side demanding accountability.
He says we would make crummy attorneys.
His advice is that we stick with those three questions, keep hammering away at those three questions, and nothing else. The answers to those three questions tells the whole story.
He says that, as laymen, we get too distracted by bells-and-whistles, such as the real or fake checks, receipts, letters, forms, whatnot.....that have absolutely nothing to do with the three questions.
He was surprised that, during that one "show" on the other conservative web-site, that we even paid any attention; whether that "evidence" was real or fake, had nothing to do with answering the three questions. He said we should not have wasted our time reading or responding; that whether real or fake, it was just junk.
The good attorney suggests we carry on as those two did on the Mike Malloy debacle--hammer away at those three questions, asking no new questions, paying no attention to any other "proof" that proves something outside those three questions, and ignoring the illiterate name-calling and cursing.
Those two on the Mike Malloy debacle did just that; they did an excellent job.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.