Uh, Stone, what was that quack chiropractor you are so proud of – the one whose video was removed from YouTube for medical misinformation – promoting?

Response

Douche bag. He was promoting healty eating. Oh, that’s what you are “calling” it. Uh Huh … Then why did YouTube pull his video for spreading “medical misinformation?” Come on, Stone – at least pretend that you are smarter than the average bear. You're the quack who lacks faith. Nah, I’m the “dick” – as you have so often called me – who challenges you to factually support the personal opinions you rely on as a replacement for logic and good judgment. With that said, I remain … Respectfully …

Gatlin - " Respectfully "

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight !!!

LOL, Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Gatlin respectful ??????

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight !!!!

What a load of BULL SHIT !!!!!!

Hundreds of others running scams, and Tater picks this story to post.

What a load of BULL SHIT !!!!!!

More like elephant sh*t....ramping up to Bronto-sh*t.

Does anyone ever wonder why Deckard posts the hit pieces on cops?

Just the corrupt criminals and murderers who wear a badge.

Oh, and the incompetent and psychotic.

While Killing a Suspect, Cops Fire 196 Rounds Into Store, With People Inside

Then there are the power-tripping assholes.

‘I Don’t Need to Give You Social Distance!’ Tyrant Cop Apparently Thinks He’s Immune to COVID-19

You seem to forget that I have also been posting "good cop" articles.

Wisconsin Sheriff Says He Will Not Enforce Stay-at-Home Order, Cites Constitutional Rights

Oh, the incompetent psychotic. Since you brough up psychotic – what do youthink this is: Spitting out at his congregation. Can you imagine how many could have sentenced to death if he had asymptomatic coronavirus? Frightening thought … If that is not scary enought - get a close look at those facial expressions.

Since you brough up psychotic – what do youthink this is:

Not a fan of Copeland.

What's your point queerbait?

And you have given yourself sole dictatorial power to use Linear partial information (LPI) as the sole method of determining who the bad cops are based only on insufficient fuzzy information you read from a biased author in his yellow journalism hit piece article. That figures … Where did you get your bias from? Is it inherited or is it something you developed out of ignorance over a period of time and perfected through repeated practice?

The bad news:

The owner of this forum seems content in allowing a psychotic troll to sh*t all over it, skid-marking credibility and vibe his forum. (For whatever inexplicable, mindless reason )

Insanity defined: Doing the same thing over & over again.

Not a fan of Copeland. What's your point … That’s finally a smart thing you said. No one should be a fan of his. But he does have many and one can only wonder why, should anyone even think about it. My point is in the form of a question. Which is - Why are you so “psychotic” in that you feel "completely obsessed" to post 4, 5, 5 or more bad cop articles daily on LF. What pleasure do you derive from doing this – or, what goal do you expect to achieve?

the sole method of determining who the bad cops are

The articles I post from FTP all have links to mainstream sources.

Yeah, I can determine who the bad cops are.

Firing 196 rounds into a store is insane.

50 Militarized Cops Destroying Family's Home Looking for an Unarmed Homeless Man Who Stole Ice Cream is INSANE!

Add to that, the family can't sue for damages.

Ninth Circuit Says Man Can't Sue Officers Who Destroyed His Home To Capture An Unarmed Homeless Man

The question is, why do you defend these psychos?

" What a load of BULL SHIT !!!!!!

More like elephant sh*t....ramping up to Bronto-sh*t. "

Exactly !!!

LOL !!!

post 4, 5, 5 or more bad cop articles daily on LF.

Check again princess - lately been posting about the coronahoax and sheep like you who drink the MSM kool-aid..

" Ignoring dis-credited sociopaths is a sensible policy.

The bad news:

The owner of this forum seems content in allowing a psychotic troll to sh*t all over it, skid-marking credibility and vibe his forum. (For whatever inexplicable, mindless reason ) "

I also am puzzled as to why the owner allows it !!

A great mystery !!

The articles I post from FTP all have links to mainstream sources. And you figure that “mainstream sources” are right? What such a novel idea, coming from you – One who constantly condems the MSM. Yeah, I can determine who the bad cops are. How did you come by this “divine power” – Is it God given? The question is, why do you defend these psychos? I have never defended a sinlee one. You are mistaking my questioning biased reporting in yellow journalism as “defending” when I am merely trying so urgently to show that you will believe conclusions you reach even when you know that you arrived at them in a biased way. Tell me that you feel this is a good thing that you consistently do. BTW – Your “copy and paste” do nothing to enhance our discussion and move it forward. You are merely attempting to use them as a “saturation defense” for your gross misconduct. And it is unsuccessful with me. Try using logical statements instead – if you are capable of doing so.

I have my suspicions of course ;-)

post 4, 5, 5 or more bad cop articles daily on LF. Check again princess - lately been posting “Lately” does not past actions excuse. Besides, old habits are hard to break. You will be back at it in full force soon. You are addicted to your methods.

What pleasure do you derive from doing this – or, what goal do you expect to achieve? You neglected to answer this question – Please do so.

The articles I post from FTP all have links to mainstream sources. The bloggers who writes the articles do absolutely no investigative journalism. Investigative journalism is a form of journalism in which reporters “deeply investigate” a topic of interest and investigative journalist may spend a lengthy amount of time researching and preparing an article. What the bloggers you use as a source do is simply take an article they discovered someplace and make it be controversial by rewriting it to include their heavy bias. So, why don’t you post the original article which is always easy to locate to copy and paste? The reason you don’t do this is readily apparent – the original story does not the biased information that you and the blogger desire to spread.

Firing 196 rounds into a store is insane. That may well be. However is that any more insane than Harold Vincent Robinson – suspected of armed robbery at two convenience stores – firing 50 shots at officers frp, inside the store? Read this teport here, and this report here - these stories contain important facts that your asshole buddy, Matt Agorist, intentionally left out so as to bias his article into another cop-hating ritual. Shameful … Where causes you to be so biased?

You seem to forget that I have also been posting "good cop" articles. Wisconsin Sheriff Says He Will Not Enforce Stay-at-Home Order, Cites Constitutional Rights How do you determine what are “good cop” articles?

The owner of this forum seems content in allowing a psychotic troll to sh*t all over it, skid-marking credibility and vibe his forum

Even flat earth retards post here.

Which is - Why are you so “psychotic” in that you feel "completely obsessed" to post 4, 5, 5 or more bad cop articles daily on LF.

The real question Alyssa is why are there so many bad cops to write about?

I also am puzzled as to why the owner allows it !!

A great mystery !!

So you have someone to talk to that doesn't agree with you.

We could just have no comments.

Also Gatlin is right occasionally.

+500

You can only give one plus.

So it is +1.

You are not 500.

How do you determine what are “good cop” articles?

Well since you asked Alyssa. If they disregard their oath to defend the Constitution then that is one way of many to tell if they are bad.

If they defend said document it is evidence that they are good.

Since the constitution forbids bans on peaceful assembly.

It has been determined that you are a domestic enemy of the people and the Sheriff is a good guy. See how that works Alyssa? If you don't understand that is ok we all know you are stupid.

why are there so many bad cops to write about? I take exception with your categorization in the use of the adjective “many.” Therefore, I need you to first define “many” before I can address your question and answer it conclusively documentated. Can you please do so?

Well since you asked Alyssa. If they disregard their oath to defend the Constitution then that is one way of many to tell if they are bad. If they defend said document it is evidence that they are good. Who makes that determination the determination that they either disregarded their oath to defend the Constitution or that they defended the Constitution?

I will move on.

I retracted noting.

It has been determined that you are a domestic enemy of the people and the Sheriff is a good guy. stupid. Who determined that and what criterion was used to make the determination? See how that works Alyssa? No, I don’t – Please answer the above question I posed to you. If you don't understand that is ok we all know you are You do not speak for “we.” You may only speak for yourself unless the “we” gives you permission to speak for them. So far, there is no evidence they have. You are being immaturely presumptive. Now, should you have a serious comment or a legitimate question, I will be more that pleased to address it. Let me know if you do.

Who makes that determination the determination that they either disregarded their oath to defend the Constitution or that they defended the Constitution?

I do Alyssa. You are not up to the task.

Quote People in the U.S. have a constitutional right to assemble peacefully—for any reason or for no reason. But as with all rights, there are some limits. The government has the right to restrict your right to gather and protest in some situations. No First Amendment rights are absolute, but the right to gather is the only one that includes the most important limit in the actual words of the amendment: “the right of the people peaceably to assemble.” That means law enforcement may break up any gathering that has turned violent or raises a “clear and present danger” of violence or disorder (Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940)). Spread of coronavirus definitely presents a “clear and present daner. Authorities may also prevent or stop gatherings that clearly pose other immediate threats to public safety. Police routinely arrest protestors who block traffic in freeways or bridges. That’s generally allowed, because maintaining public safety involves keeping streets open and traffic moving. At the same time, however, courts have repeatedly held that authorities aren’t justified in breaking up public protests just because they slow traffic, inconvenience pedestrians, are annoying, or make other people mad (see, for example, Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229 (1963) and Coates v. City of Cincinnati, 402 U.S. 611 (1971)). As is true for limits on free speech, courts have held that government may set rules on where, when, and how public protests and other gatherings can take place, as long as those rules: There are others … I will ask youa direct question and I will ask that you please answer it. The question is: Do you sincerely believe that eople in the U.S. have a constitutional right to assemble peacefully anytime and at any place?

Who makes that determination the determination that they either disregarded their oath to defend the Constitution or that they defended the Constitution? I do Alyssa. What gave you that right to do so?

I wiah to answer your question.

You can only give one plus.

So it is +1.

You are not 500.

My scoring system is different.

I'm willing to compromise.

+250 + 1/2.

See? I'm only actually 50% of the "pretentious pr*ck" you believe I am.

I also am puzzled as to why the owner allows it !! A great mystery !! Just tell the whining little bitch to shut the fuck up and that you will run your forum the way you want to and not to satisfy his mysterious puzzlement.

Please respond to this post. I wiah to answer your question. Never mind – I just did on another thread.

But as with all rights, there are some limits. The government has the right to restrict your right to gather and protest in some situations.

Ok dunce lets start here. The constitution is the Supreme law of the land.

You have to change it with an amendment. If we can't start with that then you can get lost and stay off this thread.

Since it is the Supreme law of the land. You have to show me something in the Constitution that says the bullshit you just posted up there. Dumbass

Disrespectfully

made pursuant

Dumb ass. What you wrote is an opinion. Comprende loser?

What does pursuant mean Alyssa?

You sound like Joe Biden pretending he is a professor only dumber.

Your comment is deleted you didn't obey.

You have to change it with an amendment. If we can't start with that then you can get lost and stay off this thread.

Since it is the Supreme law of the land. You have to show me something in the Constitution that says the bullshit you just posted up there. Dumbass

Disrespectfully