Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Ah, a "google is a liberal slave" conspiracy theorist.There is, you just have to want to find it not willingly ignore it. Using all of the search engines available on the Internet will broaden your horizons, you get all sides of the story not just the politically correct one.
That's exactly the argument you're making; that hate crimes are separate crimes in and of themselves.
Does this mean you're just dancing around admitting the truth?
Ah, a "google is a liberal slave" conspiracy theorist.
And I'm telling you that he did not. He was trying to get sympathy for himself. Whether the police investigated it as a hate crime or not does not relate to Smollett's motives at all. Or are you trying to claim that the police would not have investigated Smollett being assaulted if he hadn't claimed the perpetrators were white?Don't bother trying to tell me what my own argument is if you aren't willing to understand it. What I have said is that Jussie Smollett abused "hate crime" law by lying that he was the victim of one in order to gain sympathy. I've already shown you that the police investigated the accusation as a hate crime from the very beginning--based on his allegations alone.
And your evidence for this is what? Made up in your own head?When you're trying to set a certain narrative for the investigation you ignore what he interviewers said don't you? And that is what they did forced a plea deal by threatening his family and them with bankruptcy, not an uncommon tactic if you pay any attention whatsoever to the "injustice" system.
That's pretty hilarious. Got any evidence to back it up? Or are you just triggered because Conservapedia doesn't come up as the first link when you google something?I'm not sure how you can consider them to be slaves to the party when it seems as if they are the ones creating the issues/stories! The party politicians doesn't seem to have enough imagination of their own so they're just following Google's lead.
Lets just say if you want to see anything other than the "popular rhetoric" with Google you have to look at least 5-6 pages deep, if it's there at all. Very rarely do you find what you want on the first page and if you do it was written by a sycophant, very amusing and completely ignorable. Use the same verbiage on one of the other search engines and it's usually on the 1st page (sometimes 2nd) and normally you get all 3 sides of the story written by both sycophants and non sycophants...
And I'm telling you that he did not. He was trying to get sympathy for himself. Whether the police investigated it as a hate crime or not does not relate to Smollett's motives at all. Or are you trying to claim that the police would not have investigated Smollett being assaulted if he hadn't claimed the perpetrators were white?
That's pretty hilarious. Got any evidence to back it up?
Or are you just triggered because Conservapedia doesn't come up as the first link when you google something?
Translation: "No, I don't have any evidence but I'll try to deflect and see if that works".Only if you have been paying any attention to events the last 2 years would what I pointed out be perfectly obvious.
Yes, you seem to be.Triggered?
Conservapedia?
Or maybe he didn't think "hate crime" but just "racially motivated violence".And the sympathy he was trying to get for himself was for what he wanted people to think was a hate crime.
Or maybe he didn't think "hate crime" but just "racially motivated violence".
"She lies"
"Constant lying"
Name the lies. You all keep insisting that AOC is ""lying"", but when it comes to actually defending that assertion, I hear crickets.
That tends to happen when your point is not legitimate criticism but smearing someone you don't like.
Ringo
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?