Joe Biden: The inflation, vacation and scandal President

[Animal]

i am not straining at all. i have seen hundreds of pictures documenting the event, the aftermath and everything else related to Jan 6th. Not one of them has a picture of any shit stains. Since that was the headline that all of these news sources chose to go with, why are there no pictures of the one thing they chose to focus front and center?

Donald Trump cheats on his wife with pornstar and Playboy playmate, two separate acts of cheating. Why are there no pictures of their body of work to accompany the news stories? How is the public to know what it is they do professionally? Why are there no pictures of the cheating acts? Sound stupid? Cause that's how you sound. Maybe if you had something to go off of, like say, disputing reports of said smearing never happening. But no, we are to trust your "instincts." Remind me, how'd that turn out while you were attempting to figure out fraud?

Also, front and center? No, front and center was the fact that they broke into the capitol to disrupt the electoral process. They were incited to do so by the inciter in chief, in furtherance of his now exposed attempted coup . I selected those articles specifically from that time because they cited what you were asking for and they lean into your rightwing paranoia complex. Now if you can't accept universally accepted reporting from left right and center spectrums in favor of unfounded conspiracy theories, it says more about you than it does about anything else.

look, dummy. try and understand this. i have read all of the news reports about that day and that many of them said that shit was wiped on walls. I have read those stories. you posting one of them again, added nothing to that. What i asked for was one. just one. a single picture of any shit smeared on a wall. They took thousands of pictures of broken windows, turned over stuff, pelosi's chair, buffalo man, you name it. even the article you posted had several pictures of the aftermath of that day. But not one picture of the one thing they chose to write about. a picture would prove it once and for all.

But no one has even one picture of that. its just rumors.

[dot]

look, dummy. try and understand this. i have read all of the news reports about that day and that many of them said that shit was wiped on walls.

You read them all? Great. Which one said it didn't happen? Feel free to get back with that report.

[Animal]

look, dummy. try and understand this. i have read all of the news reports about that day and that many of them said that shit was wiped on walls.

You read them all? Great. Which one said it didn't happen? Feel free to get back with that report.

meanwhile. if you run across even one single picture of any of these shit smeared walls, could you post it? Please? That would be great.

[dot]

meanwhile. if you run across even one single picture of any of these shit smeared walls, could you post it? Please? That would be great.

Not exactly something I seek out. Odd that you do, but even more odd that you reject universal reporting about it. So just disclose, what is it that makes universal reporting something you reject? Does it extend to other subjects? Like I said, do you dispute the Holocaust? Perhaps the Clinton Lewinsky affair, I mean, did you ever visually inspect the dress to be sure? The Watergate break in, did it really happen? Aha, 9/11, a classic, did a plane really crash into the Pentagon? What do your instincts tell you about those? After all, you didn't see those happen either right?

[Animal]

meanwhile. if you run across even one single picture of any of these shit smeared walls, could you post it? Please? That would be great.

Not exactly something I seek out. Odd that you do, but even more odd that you reject universal reporting about it. So just disclose, what is it that makes universal reporting something you reject? Does it extend to other subjects? Like I said, do you dispute the Holocaust? Perhaps the Clinton Lewinsky affair, I mean, did you ever visually inspect the dress to be sure? The Watergate break in, did it really happen? Aha, 9/11, a classic, did a plane really crash into the Pentagon? What do your instincts tell you about those? After all, you didn't see those happen either right?

i find that in this day of "click bait" journalism that all it takes is one news magazine source to post something that catches the public's attention (like shit smearing) and then every other news source in the country runs with it. No one checks sources or credibility because they can do what you are doing and point to other news sources as their source. Its like having every clock in town set by the time on every other clock with no one actually doing any work to find out what the real time is.

so, I would assume, with all of the pictures that photographers took that day there would be ONE picture of these shit smeared walls. But there are not. Because, I believe, that whole part of the story was made up.

[dot]

i find that in this day of "click bait" journalism that all it takes is one news magazine source to post something that catches the public's attention (like shit smearing) and then every other news source in the country runs with it. No one checks sources or credibility because they can do what you are doing and point to other news sources as their source. Its like having every clock in town set by the time on every other clock with no one actually doing any work to find out what the real time is.

so, I would assume, with all of the pictures that photographers took that day there would be ONE picture of these shit smeared walls. But there are not. Because, I believe, that whole part of the story was made up.

Then surely you've seen something contrary to tell you that. You've read all the reports as you claim. What gave you the inclination that it's made up? Which report was contrary to that? Don't be shy now, after all, you've got good "instincts." Let's hear it.

[Animal]

i find that in this day of "click bait" journalism that all it takes is one news magazine source to post something that catches the public's attention (like shit smearing) and then every other news source in the country runs with it. No one checks sources or credibility because they can do what you are doing and point to other news sources as their source. Its like having every clock in town set by the time on every other clock with no one actually doing any work to find out what the real time is.

so, I would assume, with all of the pictures that photographers took that day there would be ONE picture of these shit smeared walls. But there are not. Because, I believe, that whole part of the story was made up.

Then surely you've seen something contrary to tell you that. You've read all the reports as you claim. What gave you the inclination that it's made up? Which report was contrary to that? Don't be shy now, after all, you've got good "instincts." Let's hear it.

the fact that there are no photos is what proves it to me. When you click on an article whose title is "Shit smeared on walls...." and they have dozens of photos of the aftermath, yet not one of them is of a shit stained wall. That's a a a dead give away every time.

[dot]

the fact that there are no photos is what proves it to me. When you click on an article whose title is "Shit smeared on walls...." and they have dozens of photos of the aftermath, yet not one of them is of a shit stained wall. That's a a a dead give away every time.

So once again, universal reporting but you don't believe it. Cause you can't see it. Alright then. Does God exist? Like I said, I'm testing your boundaries on what you will accept and won't accept. Because you don't seem to want to disclose why you distrust this particular facet of that day. Perhaps it's because you want to disbelieve everything about that day. If that's all it is, just admit it.

[CHEEZY17]

It was also "universally reported" that Hunters laptop was "Russian disinformation".
It was also "universally reported" that Covid originated in a wet market.
etc. etc.

"Universally reported" isnt the massive flex you think, bud.

[dot]

It was also "universally reported" that Hunters laptop was "Russian disinformation".
It was also "universally reported" that Covid originated in a wet market.
etc. etc.

"Universally reported" isnt the massive flex you think, bud.

You're more than welcome to showcase the contrary reports. I've already asked for it.

[Animal]

It was also "universally reported" that Hunters laptop was "Russian disinformation".
It was also "universally reported" that Covid originated in a wet market.
etc. etc.

"Universally reported" isnt the massive flex you think, bud.

You're more than welcome to showcase the contrary reports. I've already asked for it.

I just read that this "rumor" of the shit smeared walls was started by a staffer that worked for Schumer and once the media got hold of it they just ran with it (click bait for the smooth brains like Dot). But now that millions of pictures and video and documented photography of the scene (before, during, and after) the lie has been exposed as there has not been one single picture to back it up. MYTH BUSTED!

[dot]

I just read that this "rumor" of the shit smeared walls was started by a staffer that worked for Schumer and once the media got hold of it they just ran with it (click bait for the smooth brains like Dot). But now that millions of pictures and video and documented photography of the scene (before, during, and after) the lie has been exposed as there has not been one single picture to back it up. MYTH BUSTED!

By all means, let's see the contrary report that this was a rumor. Shouldn't be a big to-do to disclose it right? Because I certainly wouldn't think you'd be anxious to crow "victory" and then it turn out you based your entire theory on a lie. That wouldn't be good for your reputed "instincts."

[Animal]

I just read that this "rumor" of the shit smeared walls was started by a staffer that worked for Schumer and once the media got hold of it they just ran with it (click bait for the smooth brains like Dot). But now that millions of pictures and video and documented photography of the scene (before, during, and after) the lie has been exposed as there has not been one single picture to back it up. MYTH BUSTED!

By all means, let's see the contrary report that this was a rumor. Shouldn't be a big to-do to disclose it right? Because I certainly wouldn't think you'd be anxious to crow "victory" and then it turn out you based your entire theory on a lie. That wouldn't be good for your reputed "instincts."

https://qr.ae/pKm2ue

[Reservoir Dog]

I just read that this "rumor" of the shit smeared walls was started by a staffer that worked for Schumer and once the media got hold of it they just ran with it (click bait for the smooth brains like Dot). But now that millions of pictures and video and documented photography of the scene (before, during, and after) the lie has been exposed as there has not been one single picture to back it up. MYTH BUSTED!

By all means, let's see the contrary report that this was a rumor. Shouldn't be a big to-do to disclose it right? Because I certainly wouldn't think you'd be anxious to crow "victory" and then it turn out you based your entire theory on a lie. That wouldn't be good for your reputed "instincts."

https://qr.ae/pKm2ue

"My Marxist son....."

[dot]

https://qr.ae/pKm2ue

So just so we're absolutely clear about this. Do you know what Quora is? That's question one. Question two, did you bother to read any/all of the rest of the replies or just those that confirmed what you wanted to be true? Multiple responses even cited what I referred you to, which for all their faults, the New York Post and DailyMail are actual reporting publications at least. Even they confirm what you are refusing to believe. Question three, are you aware of how close you are to Pizzagate levels of legitimacy (or lack thereof)? Or perhaps you prefer Jewish space lasers as a frame of reference? I can keep going on, but I think if you actually have your touted good "instincts" then you should realize you played yourself. Your own source is nothing but a reply from an amateur pro-Trump conspiracy theorist (don't believe me, open his profile) angry that someone dared to speak truth of his ideological allies that participated in an insurrection that day. So when I say where is your contrary reporting, I mean where is the actual reporting? This is little more than your Bob from the corner store talking out of his ass stories that you've floated in the past. For the sake of your "instincts," come on man. Do better.

[dot]

Afterthought followup, I really thought you'd at least have been referencing something I hadn't already read. Such disappoint.

[Animal]

think what it must take for a father to call his son a marxist. have you even thought of that?

[dot]

think what it must take for a father to call his son a marxist. have you even thought of that?

Jim Harrison
Studied at Yale UniversityAuthor has 1.5K answers and 323.3K answer views · 2y
The interesting question to me is whether your Marxist son is actually a Marxist. I mean he could be, of course; but Marxist = I don’t agree with you in MAGA speech, hence my question.

So are we just going to go down the list of the replies before you tuck tail and run on this? Also, what makes you think the original question was posed by a father? Why not a mother? Doesn't make a difference, but I'm genuinely fascinated about how your brain works. Or doesn't work as exemplified.

[Animal]

Dupety Dupe Dot just can't contain himself with the conspiracy about feces.

How about this indepth media coverage of the aftermath, with detailed pictures every step of the way showing all of the destruction even down to a can of Axe Body Spray left behind by the protestors. But, guess what? No shit smeared wall pictures.

https://www.businessinsider.com/photos- ... oup-2021-1

[dot]

Dupety Dupe Dot just can't contain himself with the conspiracy about feces.

How about this indepth media coverage of the aftermath, with detailed pictures every step of the way showing all of the destruction even down to a can of Axe Body Spray left behind by the protestors. But, guess what? No shit smeared wall pictures.

https://www.businessinsider.com/photos- ... oup-2021-1

So, we're back to because you don't see it, it didn't happen? I mean, I'm not the one who is desperate to buck universal reporting and deny the reality of the January 6 insurrection. So another couple of questions, does Business Insider refute the human excrement being on the walls as reported? Does the absence of a refutation somehow make you think your argument is stronger?

Too complicated for you? Ok, you know what else we don't see in the pictures? The Trump insurgent who got herself killed. Did that still happen? Your reps sure seem to think so. But you don't see pictures of that. Where does your belief of the reporting start and where does it end? I get that it took a while to extract your source for this theory, but just because it clearly wasn't the game changer you thought it was, it shouldn't deter you from disclosing more of your thought processes. After all, this is your conspiracy theory. I'm just chuckling at the self implosion you're demonstrating for us. I eagerly await more entertainment.

[CHEEZY17]

I dont know if the story is accurate or not but it does seem odd that with literally hundreds of hours of video tape that has been released into the public domain and countless pics taken that day there isnt a single image of shit on the walls. That seems like something the people looking to exploit the protest would jump on.

[Animal]

Dupety Dupe Dot just can't contain himself with the conspiracy about feces.

How about this indepth media coverage of the aftermath, with detailed pictures every step of the way showing all of the destruction even down to a can of Axe Body Spray left behind by the protestors. But, guess what? No shit smeared wall pictures.

https://www.businessinsider.com/photos- ... oup-2021-1

So, we're back to because you don't see it, it didn't happen? I mean, I'm not the one who is desperate to buck universal reporting and deny the reality of the January 6 insurrection. So another couple of questions, does Business Insider refute the human excrement being on the walls as reported? Does the absence of a refutation somehow make you think your argument is stronger?

Too complicated for you? Ok, you know what else we don't see in the pictures? The Trump insurgent who got herself killed. Did that still happen? Your reps sure seem to think so. But you don't see pictures of that. Where does your belief of the reporting start and where does it end? I get that it took a while to extract your source for this theory, but just because it clearly wasn't the game changer you thought it was, it shouldn't deter you from disclosing more of your thought processes. After all, this is your conspiracy theory. I'm just chuckling at the self implosion you're demonstrating for us. I eagerly await more entertainment.

look, dupity dupe, there's a lot of people that think big foot is a hoax and you know why? because no one has any pictures of one. who are the conspiracy nutters? the ones that think its a hoax or the ones that go to meetings about it?

back to your conspiracy theory about the shit smeared walls.... I am pretty sure if the police had left the body in the capitol building for a few days then those reporters would have taken a picture of it. Just like they would have taken a picture of the shit smeared walls if they had existed. because, that's what they were doing. taking pictures of weird things that would interest people. like nancy pelosi's name plate missing from her door. and axe body spray can. but, no shit smearing. not even a mention of it.

[dot]

I dont know if the story is accurate or not but it does seem odd that with literally hundreds of hours of video tape that has been released into the public domain and countless pics taken that day there isnt a single image of shit on the walls. That seems like something the people looking to exploit the protest would jump on.

So you think between 1) a conman inciting his followers to commit an insurrection against the seat of government for the purposes of causing chaos so the electoral process sealing his defeat would be disrupted or even thrown out or 2) aforementioned dupes defecating and smearing it on the walls of the capitol, it's #2 that's the more egregious and thus exploitable offense? Can you guess which of your labels apply with this train of thought?

look, dupity dupe, there's a lot of people that think big foot is a hoax and you know why? because no one has any pictures of one. who are the conspiracy nutters? the ones that think its a hoax or the ones that go to meetings about it?

Idgaf about Bigfoot. But just so you are crystal clear on this, you're the one with the nutter butter conspiracy theory. Ask yourself again what you're expecting us to believe for your theory to have any merit. Every publication report, yes every until you can come up with something legit and contrary, says this happened. Right left and center leaning, every one says it did. For that to have happened, every publication would have had to get together and agree to present this as the narrative. You're the only one saying it didn't and you don't have any contrary reporting to support that. When pressed, the one thing you provide that supports your hypothesis is an internet comment which also refers back to evidence that outweighs both the comment and your hypothesis. Like I said, did you bother to read the rest of what you linked? I'm suspecting you didn't. I half respect you tried to draw a parallel but you f'd up going with Bigfoot. A better example would be the moon landing. And guess what, you're on the side saying the moon landing didn't happen.

back to your conspiracy theory about the shit smeared walls.... I am pretty sure if the police had left the body in the capitol building for a few days then those reporters would have taken a picture of it. Just like they would have taken a picture of the shit smeared walls if they had existed. because, that's what they were doing. taking pictures of weird things that would interest people. like nancy pelosi's name plate missing from her door. and axe body spray can. but, no shit smearing. not even a mention of it.

Except it is mentioned. Referenced. Cited. In every report so far cited and many more that we've foregone. But like I said, this is to gauge where your belief in reporting begins and where it ends. So you seem to accept the woman got herself shot. You didn't see it, but you accept it. Why not this? And just because I'm feeling generous in indulging your dive into conspiracy theorist rabbit hole, I'll humor you a little. Since you tried to float the "think what it must take for a father to call his son a marxist. have you even thought of that?" line, have you ever thought that maybe pictures of human feces as an instrument of insurrection isn't something preferable to publish? That it might just turn away readers, subscribers, and ad buyers alike? I mean, we know people got hurt throughout the insurrection, some fatally. But we don't typically see the reporting outfits publish pictures of the blood or injury from that day. Did it ever occur to you that some things did happen but aren't deemed fit to publish? Like I said, for someone with claimed good "instincts," it's fascinating to see you continue to dig as deep of a hole as you're digging.

[Animal]

for the record, dupity dot, i have seen pictures of the moon landing. so i feel pretty certain that one happened. you really suck at coming up with similar examples. at least my big foot example is spot on. its a hoax and there has never even been one proven photo to exist to prove they exist. but the nutters continue to believe it. a nutter similar to dupity dot could probably post me 2 milion "credible" news stories that prove bigfoot is real. none with any authenticated pictures, but, you know. that doesn't matter, it only matters if they wrote about it.

like the nutters that believe schumer's aide story that spread like wildfire through the nutter news, but no one took a picture of it. why is that? Oh, maybe its because there wasn't anything to take a picture of. face it, stupid. you know as good as i do that if there had been shit smeared walls, there would be pictures of that all over the news stories that covered it. fortunately for them they have screwballs like you to keep the fires burning on their ridiculous stories that would be more suited for the National Enquirer, which is what these news sources have become.

[dot]

for the record, dupity dot, i have seen pictures of the moon landing. so i feel pretty certain that one happened. you really suck at coming up with similar examples. at least my big foot example is spot on. its a hoax and there has never even been one proven photo to exist to prove they exist.

Except Idgaf about Bigfoot. Because you're the one with the nutter butter conspiracy theory. You're not gonna find me arguing that Bigfoot does or does not exist, I literally do not care. And as much as you want to deny it, you are arguing parallel to what a moon landing denier would argue. If you don't like that, choose better hills to die on.

but the nutters continue to believe it. a nutter similar to dupity dot could probably post me 2 milion "credible" news stories that prove bigfoot is real. none with any authenticated pictures, but, you know. that doesn't matter, it only matters if they wrote about it.

like the nutters that believe schumer's aide story that spread like wildfire through the nutter news, but no one took a picture of it. why is that? Oh, maybe its because there wasn't anything to take a picture of. face it, stupid. you know as good as i do that if there had been shit smeared walls, there would be pictures of that all over the news stories that covered it. fortunately for them they have screwballs like you to keep the fires burning on their ridiculous stories that would be more suited for the National Enquirer, which is what these news sources have become.

See, the thing is, it's only you that says it didn't happen. You have yet to provide any contrary reporting to the fact that it happened. Meanwhile, every news source and reporting confirms and concurs. Do you get how impossible that is outside of facts in a polarized alternative facts media era? And when you finally dared to reveal where you got the idea, you clearly didn't realize it was an internet Q&A database where anyone can post anything on any subject. Furthermore, you didn't even realize that evidence disproving your theory was contained in the very same source. As much as you want everyone else to be the conspiracy theorist, I'm afraid your good "instincts" failed you on this. You got played, and you have no one to blame but yourself.