One of the leading apologists for the professors wrote in last week to say how she was unconvinced by my claims to have caught the professors out in numerous lies. The irony is that she unwittingly betrays herself by showing that she herself knows that they were lying.
Ms. Redboots claimed that after reviewing two days of court testimony, she concludes that the Bushes did nothing worse ("nothing more nefarious", she says) than try to evade service of court documents. But if she believes that's what they did, then she knows that they were lying about the home invasion.
Nothing more nefarious? There is indeed something worse than trying to avoid service of documents, Ms. Redboots. And that's lying about it to get someone else thrown in jail.
And I'd say that refusing to admit that while holding yourself up as an objective arbiter of proper conduct makes you a bit of a hypocrite.
Yeah, that's not necessarily true. By not taking the documents from you directly, and insisting on receiving them through other channels, they were trying to evade the court documents. That in no way contradicts the home invasion.
ReplyDeleteYour argument is invalid. Go home.
You don't get it. It doesn't matter if the home invasion took place or not. It's the lying about the evading service that Ms. Redboots is whitewashing.
DeleteShe says "the worst thing they did was try to evade service." That makes her a hypocrite, because even if the home invasion story was true (which NO ONE believes), they still lied when they denied trying to evade service.
Yeah, right ... you'd know. Why don't you go back to cleaning toilets and lying about being an engineer? Must be nice to have a failed politician on-his-last-legs QC in court helping you abuse the legal system. Dang it will be good when they make you pay the bills and then sue you for slander and costs. Disgusting you are.
Delete