- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/3/21 at 7:46 pm to the808bass
quote:
When I go to your mom’s house, she’s inviting me over for dinner. When we have sex, it didn’t really happen because she invited me over for dinner.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 7:49 pm to KirbySmartass
quote:
If I were Chauvin’s attorney, I would have a chubby at this point.
If I were Chauvin’s attorney, I’d be trying to think of an excuse for not striking this guy
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:05 pm to Jeff Boomhauer
quote:
If I were Chauvin’s attorney, I’d be trying to think of an excuse for not striking this guy
yea. Nelson knew he was pro-BLM and had seen and discussed the videos of the murder. pretty big frick up not digging into the extent of that if he thought there was potential partiality.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:08 pm to AMS
quote:
yea. Nelson knew he was pro-BLM and had seen and discussed the videos of the murder. pretty big frick up not digging into the extent of that if he thought there was potential partiality.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:10 pm to Jeff Boomhauer
quote:
Concise. I approve.
This post was edited on 5/3/21 at 8:11 pm
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:11 pm to GeauxTigerTM
This has got to be the easiest slam dunk of an appeal ever
The only reason he wouldn't win this appeal is because it's rigged against him
The only reason he wouldn't win this appeal is because it's rigged against him
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:19 pm to the808bass
quote:your response doesnt seem to fit context. "it didnt really happen" isnt the same framework, which was what was the scenario primarily about?
its reasonable to assume that when a topic is about something it means the primary topic.
When I go to your mom’s house, she’s inviting me over for dinner. When we have sex, it didn’t really happen because she invited me over for dinner.
Its unclear what you mean to suggest the scenario is "about". is it about going to my mom's overall, about going specifically for dinner then serendipitous sex, about a dinner sex-excuse?
overall - then its about going to my moms house, not about dinner or sex despite those being part of it.
dinner + serendipity sex- then your secenario is about going for dinner. also sex happened, but it wasnt about going over for sex.
sexcuse - then it was about sex.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:23 pm to AMS
If you ask me if I had sex with your mom and I say “no” because the invite was for dinner, I’m being dishonest. The fact you can’t parse that out demonstrates pretty clearly what mental candlepower we’re dealing with.
This post was edited on 5/3/21 at 8:24 pm
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:24 pm to AMS
In this hypothetical, he goes over wearing a shirt with your mom's face that says "Get your hands on my dick."
But when he tells you he was just there for dinner, you obviously have to believe him.
But when he tells you he was just there for dinner, you obviously have to believe him.
This post was edited on 5/3/21 at 8:25 pm
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:24 pm to AMS
"yes. because mlk march is not about police brutality."
You know at Aushwitz, they may have killed a lot of Jews, but they served one hell of a chicken soup.
You know at Aushwitz, they may have killed a lot of Jews, but they served one hell of a chicken soup.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:28 pm to the808bass
quote:
If you ask me if I had sex with your mom and I say “no” because the invite was for dinner, I’m being dishonest. The fact you can’t parse that out demonstrates pretty clearly what mental candlepower we’re dealing with.
thats mixing questions.
in the appropriate context the question would be were you invited over for sex, you could truthfully answer no because you were invited for dinner whether or not you had sex.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:32 pm to AMS
Everyone knows that your mom puts out so it is indeed about sex. 
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:32 pm to AMS
Your mom also sent over an agenda that included sex, if we're keeping this as close to the protest as possible.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:35 pm to AMS
quote:
in the appropriate context the question would be were you invited over for sex, you could truthfully answer no because you were invited for dinner whether or not you had sex.
You’re fricking up the analogy for your own shitty argument. You’ve embarrassed yourself and your mother.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:36 pm to GeauxTigerTM
I applaud him for exercising his freedoms to protest whatever he wants to protest. He should have honestly answered the questions. If he committed a crime, then he should be convicted and sentenced.
He should receive the same standard he used to convict Chauvin. If he made up his mind that Chauvin was guilty prior to hearing the case, then he should be considered guilty by all of the jurors that hear his case, so he does not get a fair trial either.
He should receive the same standard he used to convict Chauvin. If he made up his mind that Chauvin was guilty prior to hearing the case, then he should be considered guilty by all of the jurors that hear his case, so he does not get a fair trial either.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:43 pm to AMS
quote:
some parts of the protest may have been about that, but that doesnt mean thats what the protest was specifically about.
and just because some parts were about that does not mean the juror participated during the minutes those parts took place. we know he didnt participate in the whole march because hes off taking pics in a restaurant.
My god.
If you're not trolling you might be legitimately retarded.
This is ULL beating Alabama at home in a blowout-level goalpost moving
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:46 pm to the808bass
quote:
You’re fricking up the analogy for your own shitty argument. You’ve embarrassed yourself and your mother.
that's the appropriate context of the question. you are pulling a switcharoo on the question being asked and the answer given.
did you have sex, no bc the invitation was dinner is 2 different topics, when the juror's question was 1 topic.
did you participate in a protest about brutality. No bc the MLK protest is about civil rights, equality and shite altho brutality may be a subsection of civil rights.
did you go watch a game about free throws? no basketball is about scoring more points not free throws although those might help.
your mom invited me over for dinner, was the invitation for sex? no, even if sex happened the invitation was dinner.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:51 pm to AMS
quote:Now do the 1/6 rally.
and just because some parts were about that does not mean the juror participated during the minutes those parts took place.
Posted on 5/3/21 at 8:53 pm to AMS
You are decent at ignoring posts that show how ridiculous you are.
You could be elite, but you'd have to ignore every post.
You could be elite, but you'd have to ignore every post.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News