SectionC3

Nice! Attack the accuser. I’ve been waiting for this one! What she said couldn’t possibly be true because she’s a woman! Or because she implicated Trump, who would never do such a thing as grab someone by the *****!

Wouldn’t that make it less likely to be a hoax? If she’s not model-worthy, then she probably would be in the Don’s league. Don is not a model, and if she was model-worthy she probably would be out of his league then, right? So you wouldn’t commit voter fraud? Just making sure. Because you said if there’s another candidate you would vote for them, “too.” Implying, of course, that you would vote for both Trump and the other candidate. And you think you’re part of the rule of law party. Sad.

So you would commit voter fraud? Sad! Gosh, if you think I’m vile I can only imagine how you perceive Donald J. Trump and his followers.

Hoax. I’m not a fool. You’re a Trumper. You support his nonsense, and Putin, and the medicinal use of Lysol. Sad!

It’s got to be a lot of work convincing yourself that all of Trump’s lies are hoaxes. I suppose it’s impressive that you’re so resolute on the issue. A little impressive. I guess.

Another Trump hoax debunked, and it’s not even 10:00 a.m. yet.

The only thing of lesser quantity than your care for my opinion is the evidence you have to support your contention with respect to a critical mass of in-person voter fraud. Have a nice day sniping at yourself, hoaxer.

This seems like real news to me. And it seems like there’s a good chance this complainant is credible. It’s too bad that evangelicals and conservatives support this predatory sexual behavior. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/17/donald-trump-accused-of-sexual-assault-by-former-model-amy-dorris?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other Discuss.

Speaking of ignoring things, I noticed that you still haven’t provided any evidence to support your wild accusations of a critical mass of in-person voter fraud that were levied a few days ago. Just a reminder that, in the absence of such evidence, I’ll have no choice but to consider your voter fraud claims a hoax.

Trump is scared of them. You believe Trump’s other fantasies. Therefore it is likely that you believe this Trump hoax. And that you tremble at the thought of communist arsonist agitators.

Hoax. I couldn't care less what randos on the Internet think about an anonymous screen name.

You're the one scared of communist arsonist agitators. Not me. Hoaxx.

That's a lot of nasty tonight, even for you. Did I trigger you?

Hoax. Did you mean (1) reasonable, as well as (2) concise, or "reasonable and concise?" The additional comma matters.

I'll miss you. Actually, I won't. Never mind.

What is Obamagate? Rule #2 evidence, please.

I'm gonna have to rule #2 your representation with spec to "the topic at hand."

Looks like relying on magic and Lysol couldn't beat the virus. Good thing we've moved on to Anti-Fa and communist arsonists to try to distract the idiots who might be willing to vote for Trump from the sad reality that is the working class economy.

Uh oh. I'd hate to see you if you were more triggered than you are now! Also, I don't really care what you do for a living. You're an internet rando. I wish you health, happiness, and success. But I don't particularly care to learn the nature of your profession. Our repartee is one where I say something, you get mad, I laugh, and we move on. That's it. Would you fire someone who disagreed with you on a different matter? Like, say the head of Antifa came to you and needed some sage advice. Would you take him or her on as a client? I'm trying to gauge your prowess and the depth of your expertise in whatever field it is that you're in.

Rule #2 on the first sentence, please.

Probably shouldn’t capitalize the last “g” if you’re going to through stones. And you want to be my financial adviser.

I self-manage my money. I don’t take advice on securities from guys who went from the world of food preparation to the financial industry. Kind of has a “used car salesman” vibe to it, so I leave that kind of stuff to the pros. Or I just do it myself. FYI: “It” is a singular reference, and “they” is a plural reference. So if you meant to refer to Anti-Fa earlier, you should have said “it.” Your use of “they” pointed to Trump’s lies. Those lies, of course, are myriad and speak for themselves. And Anti-Fa is just another one of your hoaxes. So there’s that.

Hoax. I am to improve the lives of all. Mr. Third n’ Long gave me some sagacious advice about courtroom demeanor. I always take stock of things conspiracy theory randos say on the Internet and, to improve the chances that others will take the advice of this savant, I thought it appropriate to help him with his grammar. He has a lot of important knowledge to share, especially on topics like fake hoaxes, the simultaneous overplay and underplay of COVID-19, pretend conservatism, the raking of forests, and triggered libs, and it’s important that it reach open minds.

You forgot your comma after concise.

You and I usually disagree, but I think you might be on to something. I needed a could of 2x4x8s a few days ago and couldn’t find any at Lowe’s. I’ll make do with scrap, but I noticed prices on other stuff seemed a bit higher than the last time I paid attention to them, and that supplies might be low.