2020 Embalmden HQ

[Pavlov]

Fine, you're okay with a potential child molester in the White House. Good thing we preserved your dignity on that one, amirite?

You're fine with it too as long as he's Republican.

If anyone comes for saying Biden molested him or her as a child, let me know.

[Spurtacular]

You're fine with it too as long as he's Republican.

I've never said that. "NarrativeTalk"

........

You on the other hand have explicitly admitted that you're okay with a potential child molester being president.

[Pavlov]

I've never said that.

"NarrativeTalk"

So if someone said Trump molested her as a child, you wouldn't want him in the White House?

[Spurtacular]

So if someone said Trump molested her as a child, you wouldn't want him in the White House?

Look at you trying desperately to get me down to your level.

You've explicitly admitted that you're okay with a potential child molester being president. I'm not sure I even want to talk to a disgusting creature like you.

[Pavlov]

Look at you trying desperately to get me down to your level.

Look at you dodging another question.

You've explicitly admitted that you're okay with a potential child molester being president. I'm not sure I even want to talk to a disgusting creature like you.

Where did I explicitly say that?

You've implicitly admitted you're okay with a potential child molester's being president.

[DMC]

[Spurtacular]

Chump trying to talk his way out of checkmate. Par.

[Pavlov]

Chump trying to talk his way out of checkmate. Par.

you don't know what the word "explicitly" means. Par.

[Spurtacular]

you don't know what the word "explicitly" means. Par.

You explicitly stated your position that you're okay with a potential child molester being in the white house.

"NarrativeTalk"

[Pavlov]

You explicitly stated your position that you're okay with a potential child molester being in the white house.

Let's see that quote.

[Spurtacular]

Let's see that quote.

You think it's fine. Why should I think any differently?

I suppose you could argue that's only directly implying.

Certainly your moral relativism about even something as low as child molestation shocks nobody though.

Poor pathetic Psychopav Chump. SMDH

[Reck]

the mind of a trumper.

Guy calls Nancy unstable or whatever and the next thing you know every Trumper is running with that despite that not even being a thought before a few days ago.

Also while ignoring Trump's own re ation.

[Pavlov]

I suppose you could argue that's only directly implying.

Certainly your moral relativism about even something as low as child molestation shocks nobody though.

Poor pathetic Psychopav Chump. SMDH

So you were completely wrong when you said explicit.

Also you implicitly agreed you had no problem with a potential child molester in the White House.

Because you don't.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

So you were completely wrong when you said explicit.

Also you implicitly agreed you had no problem with a potential child molester in the White House.

Because you don't.

lol derp

I never agreed in any fashion. That's you doing your shameless narrative. Par.

You on the other hand were actively exploring justification for having a potential child molester in the White House.

[Pavlov]

I never agreed in any fashion. That's you doing your shameless narrative. Par.

You on the other hand were actively exploring justification for having a potential child molester in the White House.

That's your narrative.

What is your threshold for concluding someone is a potential sexual predator of any sort?

Make yourself very clear for once.

[Spurtacular]

That's your narrative.

You were conducting yourself in such a way that one is left to believe you could tolerate a potential child molester in the WH.

[Pavlov]

You were conducting yourself in such a way that one is left to believe you could tolerate a potential child molester in the WH.

That's your narrative.

[Spurtacular]

That's your narrative.

Well, let's just look at the fact. You didn't do a hard line against Biden if he is a potential cm. Instead you tried moral relativism based on Trump.
This isn't an issue that hits home for you; that doesn't surprise me.

[Pavlov]

Well, let's just look at the fact. You didn't do a hard line against Biden if he is a potential cm. Instead you tried moral relativism based on Trump.
This isn't an issue that hits home for you; that doesn't surprise me.

You'll have to define potential child molester. Just casting aspersions at Biden doesn't do it.

Define potential child molester.

You won't.

[Spurtacular]

You'll have to define potential child molester. Just casting aspersions at Biden doesn't do it.

Define potential child molester.

You won't.

Does tweeking a girl's nipple above the clothes count?

[Pavlov]

Does tweeking a girl's nipple above the clothes count?

Does it with you?

What other criteria do you use?

You seem to be claiming some expertise here.

Educate us.

[Spurtacular]

Does it with you?

What other criteria do you use?

You seem to be claiming some expertise here.

Educate us.

So, you're taking a pass, huh.

Again, this isn't a subject that hits home for a psychopav.

Fillibusters and sperm shielding all you gonna do.

[ChumpDumper]

So, you're taking a pass, huh.

Again, this isn't a subject that hits home for a psychopav.

Fillibusters and sperm shielding all you gonna do.

So the only criterion is that he's a Democrat.

OK

[Spurtacular]

So the only criterion is that he's a Democrat.

OK

And more narrative.

[Spurtacular]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartandhp

I half way agree with Creepy Joe. Walking corpse is much better.