Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Now you pathetically backslide that you never specifically addressed the twitter address itself. How utterly pathetic a tapdance. Beevul's lame excuse is that he never specifically contended 'the Shannon@_Shannonwatts twitter address is Valid'.
It is a response to you claiming that "You've also asserted it's validity directly or indirectly several times elsewhere."
In spite of the probability that the Shannon twitter address was a fabrication by an evil minded rightwing online opponent, a bogus account to deceive that Shannon was the writer, we are supposed to believe beevul's smear that Shannon watts, spokeswoman for 'Moms demand action against gun violence', actually wrote it, BECAUSE THE ALL KNOWING BEEVUL THINKS SO.
The probability, is that it was her account and she deleted, James. Because gun control orgs tend to be dishonest as the day is long, as do their spokes people, and quite regularly, their supporters. I've already demonstrated that "we are not in any way anti-gun" is a lie. That makes watts a proven liar, since those were her words.
You've made a big point, James, of linking to the page where she quotes pro-gun people attacking her, and the best explanation you're able to come up with which is reaching, even for you, is that its a combination of tweets or a misquote or whatever.
Tell you what James, that tweet is all over the internet. I've seen it a hundred times or more, doing searches on the esteemed mrs watts. It is strange, that in spite of it being all over and widely known on the internet, that she hasn't included it as a misquote or an attack by pro-gun folks. She is no doubt well aware that it exists, yet she doesn't include it in her examples of pro-gun folks attacking her.
That speaks volumes.
So there you have it folks, even though Shannon watts is a demonstrated proven liar on the gun issue, and the spokesperson for a group created by a demonstrated proven racist megalomaniac who is clearly against guns, we are supposed to default to thinking that Shannon watts doesn't want to take anyones guns, and that this tweet is false. BECAUSE THE ALL KNOWING JAMES THINKS SO.
How does this work in beevul-land? You post the link for a year, stand behind it & defend it & even bump your contention that it's valid, then I expose the twitter address discrepancy & ask you to explain, and I'M supposed to prove it's a fake?
It is a discrepancy only in your mind James. If you're going to assert that its fake, PROVE that its fake, or be laughed and pointed at for failing to.
No, you posted the link & the dubious twitter address, it's incumbent upon YOU to prove it's valid from SW; I've already exposed your link as suspect & probably a plant, I've done my part - there is preponderance of the evidence that beevul is dishing out a pile of BS.
Prepare to be hoist on your own petard, James:
preponderance of evidence: A requirement that more then 50% of the evidence points to something.
Evidence that points to the tweet not being made by watts? Zip zero nadda.
Evidence that points to it being made by watts? Plenty, even if circumstantial, is still more than none.
By your own standards, You lose.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
73 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read