Wow dude, you really this obsessed?
Louis Weeks

Mr Weeks,

You are exceptionally predictable. Thank you for proving and validating my points. I also see you have not changed any, you are still unable to refrain from being dishonest. Let’s discuss that shall we?

  1. To continue your dishonest attempt to paint me a Forum Troll, or Paid Operative in order to ‘justify’ you refusal to deal with your out right lies and fabrications, you cite as ‘proof’ that only a “paid agent and troll” would go “though several months” of your “comments to try and find anything to attack” you with. Where that falls completely apart is that there is no way for anyone to browse your comments in June and July of this year. Think Progress changed their platform over to Medium AFTER those months, and the comments from then are no longer available to anyone. Of course, a normal common person would remember if they had am extended conversation with someone. I do, and I remember our conversation. It was also helpful that given your long history of Partisan Tribal Politics, as well as your complete dishonesty, that I had a few screenshots online from that past conversation. If you were not a troll with a Prolific Posting history, you would have remembered that, as well as the simple fact I used a few screenshots to prove you were lying about what you claimed you had said. You did get rather irate that you were caught lying about your own statements in such a public way.
  2. I have known people who have achieved many accomplishments in different areas. I also know people who have extremely diverse Hobbies and a thirst for gaining new knowledge. You are not one of them. Also, given you rather severe level of dishonesty it is beyond credulence to accept any statement about your achievements, whether made in the past, or present.
  3. You again prove your complete lack of the Medical Field, as “experts” would not have that discussion with you as it would be unprofessional as well as unethical. The only way to have a discussion with Medical Experts is to either A. Work in that Field, or B. Be VERY good friends with them. Since you admit you do not work in that field that rules out A, and since you have as recently as two months ago professed that you only dealt with the Medical Field when you went the clinic or a hospital, that rules out B. Since you would have to consult experts in more than one field, this clearly shows your are outright lying. You have obviously forgotten our previous long conversation. My Wife works in the Medical Field, in the Specialty Areas. There is also the simple fact you claimed to have used “educated observation” in making your decision and opinion. That clearly states you are educated in the area necessary to make conclusion from an observation. Of course, you are dishonest so this is no surprise you forgot what you had previously stated when you shifted your story again.
  4. You dodge every question, and being a dishonest troll you answer the same way you make your points. With Lies and Dishonesty.
  5. You cannot show anywhere that I have lied, so you change your story again and point out “lies of omission”. In order for that to have any relevance there would have to be an omission. There are none which is why you omitted an example of one. You then proceed to claim I am lying by being dishonest in a general way while you yourself dishonestly make the tired claim that I am “paid” and a “troll” with you proof that I “trolled” your old post that no longer exist and would not be possible to recall or have any information from unless it was a person you had a lengthy discussion with. I don’t need to dig anything up Moron, I already had verification that you were a lying pos.
  6. I knew you would be unable to resist the TPP point, since it clearly showed what a lying POS you are. Here is where you clearly display that you are the only one lying and being dishonest. You accuse me of “lies of omission”, and yet claim I am lying because I did not omit something. You claimed Mr Clinton changed her mind and lied about the TPP for Political Reasons. I engaged in discussion about that, considered all reasonable possibilities, and agree with your conclusion. You claim that I created excuses her for just by discussion all possibilities and refusing to omit details in order to have an accurate summation. You are lying since I did not omit anything. You are lying because discussion about a situation as a whole and acknowledging all possibilities to create a reasonable conclusion is not dishonest. It is the definition of Honesty. You FLAT OUT LIED when you claim that I said Mrs Clinton “ maybe Hillary was just looking for votes”. Since I clearly have stated TWICE “ My “opinion” would be in agreement with yours that it was for Political Reasons”. That is not “maybe”, Maybe means perhaps; possibly. I used the word “probably”, which means almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell. Your entire example is dishonest in the extreme.
  7. This is an example that occurred AFTER you accused me of lying. It is also not an example of of Lie or Dishonesty on my Part. It is a clear act of dishonesty on yours, since if you had read the example, it is clear that I have omitted nothing, since I covered the timeline completely. I also stated in no uncertain terms “ KNOWING this timeline, KNOWING that Mrs Clinton had never previously stated any objection to the TPP, KNOWING that she had 3 Months to review the Final Version stated the she STILL did not voice opposition to it.” So your accusation is a lie. The TPP Leak in 2013 occurred in November of that year, and had the August 31st 2013 version of the TPP. Which had 7 months of changes and Additions from when Mrs Clinton left office. The changes made and additions made after she left office would have been new to her. Since there is no released copy from before she left office there is no basis for comparison, however, the overall points would have had to have her consent. For this reason neither you nor I can state with certainty what she would have known or not known. I also stated in no uncertain terms that she helped create the Framework, which is what was filled in with further negotiations. Since you wish to omit that section since it proves you're wrong in your assertion. Of course being a dishonest hack, you accuse me of being dishonest because I will not omit when making my points. Of course the fact that I cover all possibilities because I am Honest bothers you since you refuse to consider any possibility that do not directly support your chosen narrative. How very dishonest of you.

You clearly still have no ability to be honest, and as I clearly showed in June and July of this year you still clearly accuse your opponents of your own failings and lack of honor and integrity. So how are you going to try and lie your way out of this one? You were directly challenged to show where I lied, You Failed to do so.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.