desert dude
Well-Known Member
Insults are par for the course here. Thick skin is required, my friend, thick skin.
Zimmerman bond revoked
- Thread starter tet1953
- Start date
Insults are par for the course here. Thick skin is required, my friend, thick skin.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Well his story about being attacked from behind on the way back to his truck smells more like bullshit than a cattle farm, it just seems like anytime he opens his mouth, even the people around him are like "wft?!".
Either way, if you're gonna openly lie about how many free $$$'s you got, you're gonna lie to get out of a murder 2 conviction.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
He'll make up something without any proof, you'll notice they always steer away from the physical evidence. We're just feeding the trolls, watch them jump and posture every time we post. Ha ha!
MuyLocoNC
Well-Known Member
That would be true if he actually did that. He was never asked directly or even asked to confirm what his wife was testifying to. When you're in court you only give answers when your asked, he wasn't so he didn't lie. Unless he's responsible for everything that anyone says under oath, is that how it works in this country? Nope.
I really couldn't care less what position you have, but condemning him over his wife's eagerness to get him out of jail is misguided.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
True, but I don't care to feed the trolls. So, I am going to give his idiotic postings the attention they deserve. I thought he might be lucid there for a minute, but I was mistaken.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point.
I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
check out red's growing adventures.Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point.
I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are
https://www.rollitup.org/newbie-central/535411-trimming-scrog.html
he thinks clipping a few branches away is going to make a plant go hermie.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
H, for the prior 6,000 posts or so on this subject in the "Trayvon" thread you have been on the side of reason. I find it hard to believe that Zimmerman's wife's lie about the content of their paypal account would somehow change your mind about the fundamental facts of the case. The only conclusion I can make is that you are trolling now for laughs, or you were trolling earlier for laughs. Either case it OK by me.Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point.
I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are
Now that you have decided on Z's guilt, how do you reconcile the physical evidence, eye witness accounts, police reports, etc, all of which corroborate Zimmerman's account of that night?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
dude, you don't even have zimmboy's account of that night, and you claim you are on the side of reason?
LOL!
douche.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
And the side of reason is the side that allows people to follow, confront then shoot people who are out for a stroll?
That combined with his edam-like story means I'd rather side with the "unreasonable" side.
I still don't think he'll go down for it, but I do think he should've just left Trayvon alone, rationalisation of this event beyond that point is kinda like winning a special Olympics medal, it's nice and all but you're still a retard (not you personally, the example person).
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Following me around? I must be more important to you than you are to me. Oh no! He's STALKING me. He's going to kill me for my skittles! Ha ha!check out red's growing adventures. https://www.rollitup.org/newbie-central/535411-trimming-scrog.html he thinks clipping a few branches away is going to make a plant go hermie.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
See what I mean? He thinks that's a valid point. If any of you has ever lied once, every thing you say afterward must be a lie. Tell you what, Harrekin, when you make a valid point, I'll be glad to tell you. Even UB can tell you I will concede a VALID point. Note I said he can, I doubt he will. Until then, I'll just let you go on without reply, as I don't see you being receptive to reason or reality. In a few I'll be too toasted to reply, but I promise I'll get back to you.Pity out of all of your posts not one makes a valid or logical point. I made a very valid "Once a liar always a liar" point and if you choose to dismiss it in your Zimm-fellating head then that's fine, but if you're just gonna just attack the poster instead of the content, then trust me, if you wanna play that game I'm alot better at it than you are
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
have you lied under oath before?
kinda different then telling your friend you think his SCROG is nice, when you can tell it's crap.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
and he sat their like a potted plant and benefitted from it after conspiring with her. conspiracy is a crime.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.
- You choose to ignore the witness statements and the physical evidence and argue conjecture.