Jump to content

The Sham Impeachment Inquiry & Whistleblower Saga: A Race to Get Ahead of the OIG


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

here, i'll show you what being jerky looks like... you know, just so you can get a 'shoe on the other foot perspective'.

 

should we get into your PM to me just prior to Thanksgiving trying to explain away your deletion of certain postings on the forum with regard to pedophilia?

 

If you want to talk about why you didn't go after the PPP pedo when he was here, feel free. 

 

You asked for evidence of me going after him and I responded, privately, but you now want to make that public. Talk about a crappy thing to do. But go ahead if it makes you feel better. I assumed a douche like you would threaten something like that.  

 

EDIT: Also, if you're going to "out" what I emailed you privately, at least get it right.

 

Quote

are you mad because i essentially told you to ***** off?

 

That's not what you said at all but if it makes you feel good to flex in public, have at it. 

Edited by John Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

If you want to talk about why you didn't go after the PPP pedo when he was here, feel free. 

 

You asked for evidence of me going after him and I responded, privately, but you now want to make that public. Talk about a crappy thing to do. But go ahead if it makes you feel better. I assumed a douche like you would threaten something like that.  

 

EDIT: Also, if you're going to "out" what I emailed you privately, at least get it right.

 

 

That's not what you said at all but if it makes you feel good to flex in public, have at it. 

i still have no idea who the ***** you are referring to here, hence why i asked you to link to it back when i did. 

 

i have no desire to make your PM to me public. you apparently missed the point i was making there as well. are you really that obtuse?

 

oh, but it is essentially what i said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

i still have no idea who the ***** you are referring to here, hence why i asked you to link to it back when i did. 

 

i have no desire to make your PM to me public. you apparently missed the point i was making there as well. are you really that obtuse?

 

oh, but it is essentially what i said.

 

jboyst

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

jboyst

thanks. was it before my time that he was outed as being a pedo? because i certainly do not remember any postings of his that would have lent any validity to that.

 

regardless, JA is just being a complete feck here.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

thanks. was it before my time that he was outed as being a pedo? because i certainly do not remember any postings of his that would have lent any validity to that.

 

 

It was an open secret.  I never bothered to learn the details.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

thanks. was it before my time that he was outed as being a pedo? because i certainly do not remember any postings of his that would have lent any validity to that.

 

regardless, JA is just being a complete feck here.

 

Says the guy who inaccurately summarized a private conversation and said he would post details of it here. 

 

It's clear who the ####### is here. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

jboyst

Was there ever any documentation of his misdeed(s)? There's a difference between banging a 16 year old when she claimed to be 18 and making a habit out of going after 12 year old girls. With that said, one instance here is a foolish mistake of statutory rape while the other would make him a true pedophile. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It was an open secret.  I never bothered to learn the details.

 

It was no secret and Google gives anything else. And while here, he made plenty of remarks about sex with minors, and even once a great defense of people attracted to post-pubescent girls being normal while those attracted to pre-pubescent girls being disgusting. He is/was atrocious. 

Edited by John Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Says the guy who inaccurately summarized a private conversation and said he would post details of it here

 

It's clear who the ####### is here. 

:lol:

reading comprehension is your friend, you feck.

 

now piss off.

 

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

here, i'll show you what being jerky looks like... you know, just so you can get a 'shoe on the other foot perspective'.

 

should we get into your PM to me just prior to Thanksgiving trying to explain away your deletion of certain postings on the forum with regard to pedophilia?

 

are you mad because i essentially told you to ***** off?

 

Edited by Foxx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Yeah. It's still you, JA. Not Foxx. :lol: 

 

Says the guy who never attacked him or tried to rid this community of him. 

 

Go back to attacking pedophiles via re-Tweets.

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

 

should we get into your PM to me

 

 

Slime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

It was no secret and Google gives anything else. And while here, he made plenty of remarks about sex with minors, and even once a great defense of people addtracted to post-pubescent girls being normal while those attracted to pre-pubescent girls being disgusting. He is/was atrocious. 

 

Yeah, I never googled him either.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Was there ever any documentation of his misdeed(s)? There's a difference between banging a 16 year old when she claimed to be 18 and making a habit out of going after 12 year old girls. With that said, one instance here is a foolish mistake of statutory rape while the other would make him a true pedophile. 

 

You can google his name, see the charge that stuck, the history, and what the judge said about what they found on his computer. 

 

If you think what happened is OK after reading that, I'd be surprised. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, John Adams said:

 

Says the guy who inaccurately summarized a private conversation and said he would post details of it here. 

 

It's clear who the ####### is here. 

The voting wasn't even close. The Greater Philadelphia Association of Failed Lawyers have awarded you the 2019 Biggest Prick Award.

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, Foxx said:

reading.

comprehension.

 

you do understand what a question mark at the end of a sentence infers, right?

 

again, piss off you worthless feck.

 

You think threatening to share private PMs is OK? And then you summarize a portion of it, and at that, summarize it inaccurately?

 

The douche spinner remains pointed at you here. 

 

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

He'll be running along to one of his alts in the next few minutes. 

 

You know what he did. You did nothing. The end. 

 

 

Edited by John Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...