Trump's Epstein note is Real

[User]

12 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

What “violence against ICE”  are you referring to? 

Just one example...

"Marimar Martinez and Anthony Ian Santos Ruiz were both indicted by a federal grand jury Thursday for assault and attempted murder of a federal employee."

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/grand-jury-marimar-martinez-shot-by-federal-agents-brighton-park-chicago/

[Chrissy1979]

4 minutes ago, User said:

You spend your time on here crying about the very things you sit here doing yourself. 

 

Another lie. How am I supposed to answer your question if you can’t even tell me what you’re asking about?

[Chrissy1979]

15 minutes ago, User said:

Just one example...

"Marimar Martinez and Anthony Ian Santos Ruiz were both indicted by a federal grand jury Thursday for assault and attempted murder of a federal employee."

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/grand-jury-marimar-martinez-shot-by-federal-agents-brighton-park-chicago/

Turns out they shot her five times because she “boxed them in” with her car. Yes, I condemn ICE violence, if that was the question,

 

[User]

32 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Another lie. How am I supposed to answer your question if you can’t even tell me what you’re asking about?

No lie, you have been crying all day long about this. 

18 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Turns out they shot her five times because she “boxed them in” with her car. Yes, I condemn ICE violence, if that was the question,

Yeah, you don't get to ram into federal agents' vehicles and box them in. 

 

[Chrissy1979]

1 minute ago, User said:

No lie, you have been crying all day long about this. 

Yeah, you don't get to ram into federal agents' vehicles and box them in. 

 

Clearly not. She was shot five times for boxing in a vehicle. Is that the only example of “violence against ICE” you could come up with? That’s pretty weak. Sure you’re better at playing the victim thsn that!

[User]

Just now, Chrissy1979 said:

Clearly not. She was shot five times for boxing in a vehicle. Is that the only example of “violence against ICE” you could come up with? That’s pretty weak. Sure you’re better at playing the victim thsn that!

It is not playing the victim when you have people maliciously following federal officers to interfere with their operations and ram their vehicles. 

Nor is it when you ambush them with gun fire or with a sniper...

Just keep playing dumb. 

 

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Chrissy1979 said:

I can prove it right now.

Go ahead then 

Quote

Show me where Trump’s rape accuser “recanted” her story.

I already posted that link for you.  She's done so twice.  AND the whole thing turned out to be a scam put up by a media guy. Sooooo.... what you're saying is that you CAN'T prove anything and you'd like me to prove AGAIN that which i've already proven before. 

LOL!!!  Poor chrissy    You know, when i said "cry harder' I didn't really mean it, but you went ahead anyway   

 

1 hour ago, Chrissy1979 said:

1. Exactly. I never said what he claimed I said. That was the most recent lie.

 

you absolutely did  

Quote

2. Exactly. She dropped her case after she was threatened. She never recanted her story. It’s pretty low to lie and discredit her after the fact, just to protect an accused paedophile, isn’t it? Or is that something you would do too?

She was never threatned.  But what you're saying is she was forced to recant her claim. But..... that would STILL mean i was right, and she recanted her claim.  Twice.  I guess the threats wore off the first time  lOLOLOL

You lost this one ages ago 

[Chrissy1979]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Go ahead then 

I already posted that link for you.  She's done so twice.  AND the whole thing turned out to be a scam put up by a media guy. Sooooo.... what you're saying is that you CAN'T prove anything and you'd like me to prove AGAIN that which i've already proven before. 

LOL!!!  Poor chrissy    You know, when i said "cry harder' I didn't really mean it, but you went ahead anyway   

 

you absolutely did  

She was never threatned.  But what you're saying is she was forced to recant her claim. But..... that would STILL mean i was right, and she recanted her claim.  Twice.  I guess the threats wore off the first time  lOLOLOL

You lost this one ages ago 

No, you posted how she dropped her case after being threatened. She never recanted. Doubling down on a pathetic lie doesn’t make it less pathetic.

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, User said:

You spend your time on here crying about the very things you sit here doing yourself. 

 

It's kind of her thing when she gets cornered 

She accuses everyone else of her own failings. 

Just now, Chrissy1979 said:

No, you posted how she dropped her case after being threatened.

Dropping her case is recanting.  I also posted the defintition of that. 

And i didn't post anything about her being threatened. That was your claim, tho you've never posted anything to back it up. 

LOLOL Just digging yourself deeper and deeper....   it must be hard to type between sobs and tears like that  

[CdnFox]

18 minutes ago, User said:

Just keep playing dumb. 

 

Oh she's not playing  

[Legato]

9 hours ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Why do you guys have to lie and put words in my mouth? 

Well it is very large and does hold a plethora of empty words.

[Chrissy1979]

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It's kind of her thing when she gets cornered 

She accuses everyone else of her own failings. 

Dropping her case is recanting.  I also posted the defintition of that. 

And i didn't post anything about her being threatened. That was your claim, tho you've never posted anything to back it up. 

LOLOL Just digging yourself deeper and deeper....   it must be hard to type between sobs and tears like that  

No, dropping her case means she withdrew from pursuing prosecution. Her stated reason for doing so was because of threats against her. She never recanted her story, which would involve saying she was lying. 

The only liar is you. And you’re an unashamed one, even when defending accused paedophiles.

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

No, dropping her case means she withdrew from pursuing prosecution.

That is recanting.  She has recanted her claim. She has formally withdrawn her accusations.  She withdrew her statement. 

4 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Her stated reason for doing so was because of threats against her.

Then why'd she file again?   And why couldn't she identify the threats or provide ANY evidence in the slightest?

She lied. And liars lie. You're living proof. 

5 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

The only liar is you.

LOL every accusation you make turns out to be a confession   

[Legato]

6 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

No, dropping her case means she withdrew from pursuing prosecution. Her stated reason for doing so was because of threats against her. She never recanted her story, which would involve saying she was lying. 

The only liar is you. And you’re an unashamed one, even when defending accused paedophiles.

You only keep on harping about that subject when shown your abject hypocrisy.

The "G" string on your harp is playing a "B♭".

[Chrissy1979]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That is recanting.  She has recanted her claim. She has formally withdrawn her accusations.  She withdrew her statement. 

Then why'd she file again?   And why couldn't she identify the threats or provide ANY evidence in the slightest?

She lied. And liars lie. You're living proof. 

LOL every accusation you make turns out to be a confession   

She said she withdrew her quest for prosecution because of threats on her life and family. She never said she was lying. I can say it over and over, and anyone who looks further into the case can see I’m not lying.

You’re a liar and you know it. You just don’t have the character to admit it, because that’s how liars are.

[Legato]

2 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

She said she withdrew her quest for prosecution because of threats on her life and family. She never said she was lying. I can say it over and over, and anyone who looks further into the case can see I’m not lying.

You’re a liar and you know it. You just don’t have the character to admit it, because that’s how liars are.

Have you ever tried a tuning fork.

[Chrissy1979]

2 minutes ago, Legato said:

Have you ever tried a tuning fork.

Indisputable, right?

[User]

8 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

She said she withdrew her quest for prosecution because of threats on her life and family. She never said she was lying. I can say it over and over, and anyone who looks further into the case can see I’m not lying.

You’re a liar and you know it. You just don’t have the character to admit it, because that’s how liars are.

What threats? Where is the police report? 

 

24 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

No, dropping her case means she withdrew from pursuing prosecution. Her stated reason for doing so was because of threats against her. She never recanted her story, which would involve saying she was lying. 

The only liar is you. And you’re an unashamed one, even when defending accused paedophiles.

No, the "prosecution" was dismissed because she had no case. She ran away from her civil suit, almost certainly for the same reasons. 

 

[Chrissy1979]

5 minutes ago, User said:

What threats? Where is the police report? 

 

No, the "prosecution" was dismissed because she had no case. She ran away from her civil suit, almost certainly for the same reasons. 

 

You’re lying snd it takes a second to prove it. 
“A lawsuit was filed in 2016 by an anonymous plaintiff using the pseudonym "Katie Johnson" (later "Jane Doe"), alleging that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein raped her in 1994 when she was 13 years old at Epstein's New York City apartment. The suit described graphic details of sexual assault, including claims that Trump tied her to a bed, forcibly raped her, and threatened her and her family's lives if she spoke out. It also alleged Epstein raped her separately and that both men knew she was underage. The plaintiff claimed she was lured to Epstein's parties with promises of modeling opportunities and money.The case was dropped shortly before the 2016 U.S. presidential election after the plaintiff reported receiving multiple death threats. Her attorney, Lisa Bloom, stated that these threats made the plaintiff too frightened to proceed, including canceling a planned press conference on November 2, 2016, where she was expected to reveal her identity publicly.”

pbs.org

[User]

3 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

You’re lying snd it takes a second to prove it. 

What is my lie?

Nothing you posted says what these threats were... no police report, nothing. 

This was like a decade ago now. So... what happened?

I will tell you what happened, she had no case. It was all BS. 

[Chrissy1979]

16 minutes ago, User said:

What is my lie?

Nothing you posted says what these threats were... no police report, nothing. 

This was like a decade ago now. So... what happened?

I will tell you what happened, she had no case. It was all BS. 

Yes, you could say that if you were comfortable with accusing self-declared child sexual abuse victims of being liars with no evidence to back that up.

[User]

2 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Yes, you could say that if you were comfortable with accusing self-declared child sexual abuse victims of being liars with no evidence to back that up.

The evidence is that they are baseless assertions with no evidence. 

What next, want me to prove there are no unicorns?

 

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

She said she withdrew her quest for prosecution because of threats on her life and family.

With absolutely zero proof. And then she reinstated her claim and then withdrew it again later. Did she forget? Did she dislike her family for a short while or something? It's so obviously fake it doesn't even deserve consideration

59 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

She never said she was lying.

No one said she did.

And once again when you can't win based on what's actually been said you just invent crap that nobody has said and decide to argue with that

1 hour ago, Chrissy1979 said:

I can say it over and over,

Oh for sure. You can lie for hours and even days at a time, the truth doesn't even slow you down a bit  

But it's still a lie

47 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

You’re lying snd it takes a second to prove it. 
“A lawsuit was filed in 2016 by an anonymous plaintiff using the pseudonym "Katie Johnson" (later "Jane Doe"), alleging that Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein raped her in 1994 when she was 13 years old at Epstein's New York City apartment. The suit described graphic details of sexual assault, including claims that Trump tied her to a bed, forcibly raped her, and threatened her and her family's lives if she spoke out. It also alleged Epstein raped her separately and that both men knew she was underage. The plaintiff claimed she was lured to Epstein's parties with promises of modeling opportunities and money.The case was dropped shortly before the 2016 U.S. presidential election after the plaintiff reported receiving multiple death threats. Her attorney, Lisa Bloom, stated that these threats made the plaintiff too frightened to proceed, including canceling a planned press conference on November 2, 2016, where she was expected to reveal her identity publicly.”

pbs.org

So she lied and never wanted to appear in public. There you go

[CdnFox]

22 minutes ago, User said:

The evidence is that they are baseless assertions with no evidence. 

What next, want me to prove there are no unicorns?

 

There is absolutely no proof that Chrissy did not regularly rape 6-year-olds who are unnamed and unidentified.

So it must be true

Literally how their logic works

[Chrissy1979]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

There is absolutely no proof that Chrissy did not regularly rape 6-year-olds who are unnamed and unidentified.

So it must be true

Literally how their logic works

I don't think the Epstein crowd made empty death threats. They were committed. You would exploit that intimidation to justify calling her a liar. And not even be ashamed doing so.