Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
9 minutes ago, safe sex said:

Go ahead and do it, Bonz. The Surly experience improves quite a bit, speaking from experience.

If everyone put him on ignore, stopped engaging, or ceased quoting the dishonest prick, it'd be even better.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
35 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Underwater basket weaving 

That actually sounds kind of hard. Unless it's just the basket that's underwater, and you the weaver are sitting in the shallows with a refreshing beverage.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, bolverk said:

If everyone put him on ignore, stopped engaging, or ceased quoting the dishonest prick, it'd be even better.

Speaking of someone who gets routinely pantsed.  Leftism as a defense mechanism right here.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

So it’s one instance?

You don’t like me.  That’s fine.  I again don’t agree that I ghost arguments.

One thing that has happened to me is I have  been given timeouts over the years, which makes cold stops appear like ghosting.  

Timeouts? You? I can’t imagine why lol. That’s the instance that comes to mind. 
 

As far as refusing to argue in good faith vs just being dumb, this thread is a prime example. Twice is laying it out for you like you were a third grader, and you post like he’s proving your point for you

 

Yes I think it’s time to put you on ignore

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

I mean, come on guys, why would the billionaire lizard robot lie to us on the Joe Rogan Experience using words he wasn't willing to say under oath and penalty of perjury?

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Timeouts? You? I can’t imagine why lol. That’s the instance that comes to mind. 
 

As far as refusing to argue in good faith vs just being dumb, this thread is a prime example. Twice is laying it out for you like you were a third grader, and you post like he’s proving your point for you

 

Yes I think it’s time to put you on ignore

Charlie Day Ok GIF

Posted
1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

I mean, come on guys, why would the billionaire lizard robot lie to us on the Joe Rogan Experience using words he wasn't willing to say under oath and penalty of perjury?

Well when you put it that way, I can see how silly I was to be *incredulous*

  • Haha 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Who is stanning for anyone?  Or are you just dropping hot takes?

It rules that you would say this after you drop a Zuckerberg clip as if it's some kind of mic drop, as if the entire reason he would even go on JRE in the first place isn't to propagandize in his and Meta's favor.

You idiot, you fucking donkey, you absolute goddamn baboon. Shut. The. Fuck. Up.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

It rules that you would say this after you drop a Zuckerberg clip as if it's some kind of mic drop, as if the entire reason he would even go on JRE in the first place isn't to propagandize in his and Meta's favor.

You idiot, you fucking donkey, you absolute goddamn baboon. Shut. The. Fuck. Up.

You ok?

lol

Posted

Also, I find it amusing that now, only now, were Biden officials "screaming and cursing."

Zuckerberg has been on this kick for four months now since gobbling Gym Jordan's crank, but only now busts this out.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

That actually sounds kind of hard. Unless it's just the basket that's underwater, and you the weaver are sitting in the shallows with a refreshing beverage.

The average brain consumes 20% of the body’s oxygen requirement. If it’s truly an underwater event he had a tremendous advantage over his classmates 

  • Haha 2
Posted
On 12/6/2024 at 4:19 AM, TwiceHorn said:

Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case.  See, in particular, Slip. Op. pp. 16-21. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411new_197d.pdf

Could he be playing both ends against the middle?  

Unpossible.  Zuck has never been accused of being a slimy little fuck.

I find this whole thing kind of fascinating.  Virtually impossible to get all of the relevent information to make an informed decision.  You stated:

"Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case."  I have searched as much as I can and can not find anywhere where Zuck gave testimony under oath in that case.  Can you show that?  It would be extremely damaging to Zuck's credibility if he did actually testify differently under oath than he is stating now on shows like Rogans.  

Posted
7 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

I find this whole thing kind of fascinating.  Virtually impossible to get all of the relevent information to make an informed decision.  You stated:

"Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case."  I have searched as much as I can and can not find anywhere where Zuck gave testimony under oath in that case.  Can you show that?  It would be extremely damaging to Zuck's credibility if he did actually testify differently under oath than he is stating now on shows like Rogans.  

Narrator: he didn’t 

Posted
16 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

I find this whole thing kind of fascinating.  Virtually impossible to get all of the relevent information to make an informed decision.  You stated:

"Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case."  I have searched as much as I can and can not find anywhere where Zuck gave testimony under oath in that case.  Can you show that?  It would be extremely damaging to Zuck's credibility if he did actually testify differently under oath than he is stating now on shows like Rogans.  

that's the whole point, he refused to testify. you're not going to find what you are looking for because it doesn't exist. the man is a coward

Posted
23 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

I find this whole thing kind of fascinating.  Virtually impossible to get all of the relevent information to make an informed decision.  You stated:

"Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case."  I have searched as much as I can and can not find anywhere where Zuck gave testimony under oath in that case.  Can you show that?  It would be extremely damaging to Zuck's credibility if he did actually testify differently under oath than he is stating now on shows like Rogans.  

 

15 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Narrator: he didn’t 

hugh laurie facepalm GIF

  • Haha 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

that's the whole point, he refused to testify. you're not going to find what you are looking for because it doesn't exist. the man is a coward

TwiceHorn can speak for himself, but did Zuck plead the fifth?  How does one "refuse to testify" if they are subpoenaed in a federal case?  

Posted
3 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Please direct me to any example of this. I don’t care what you think of me.  I don’t agree with the assertion I have ignored direct conversations.

There was definitely a time where Sidis pantsed you over and over in an economic discussion and you disappeared from the thread. Wish I could find it. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Da Fino said:

There was definitely a time where Sidis pantsed you over and over in an economic discussion and you disappeared from the thread. Wish I could find it. 

If do please direct me to it.  Other than that, good talk, Russ.

Posted
On 12/6/2024 at 4:19 AM, TwiceHorn said:

Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case.  See, in particular, Slip. Op. pp. 16-21. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411new_197d.pdf

Could he be playing both ends against the middle?  

Unpossible.  Zuck has never been accused of being a slimy little fuck.

Were you able to find Zuck’s testimony?

Posted
1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

I would say you cannot possibly be this stupid, but then again, you are

Sheet GIF

You are one seriously disturbed dude.

 

Posted

I did some more digging, maybe this has already been hashed out on here and I missed it.  If so, it would be pretty easy to direct me to that info.

I found TwiceHorn's post interesting.  Here is what he said:

"Curious that Zuck didn't give that same testimony, in detail, under oath when subpoenaed in that case.  See, in particular, Slip. Op. pp. 16-21. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411new_197d.pdf"  

I read the case he posted and it made zero mention of Zuck at all.  So I researched it a bit but could not find anything, at all, related to Zuck testifying or being subpoenaed in that case.  Twice is a lawyer so maybe he has access to sites I am unaware of that detail this kind of stuff, which is why I asked him to respond.  

I did find the stuff where Jim Jordan subpoenaed Meta (and all the big social media companies) for information and where Jordan threatened to hold Zuck in contempt for Meta not providing the requested info in a timely fashion.  It appears Jordan was ultimately satisfied with the info Meta provided.

I found no instance where Zuck either did testify under oath or refused to testify under oath regarding any of the censorship claims.  That is why I asked Twice to elaborate as he is generally truthful in the stuff he posts.  

I am certain Zuck was cagey about the issue.  Twice called him a slimy little fuck, and he very well may be.  I would certainly agree that he was a slimy little fuck if he did, in fact, testify under oath, or refuse to testify under oath,  in a different manner than he showed on Rogan.  I wanted to see what he said under oath which is what Twice implied.

 



×
×
  • Create New...