Documented: Comments by dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks) regarding accusations against Ed Schultz of domestic violence by his ex-wife Maureen.
Rusty, Domestic violence? In light of how WD defends and supports Scott Ritter's sex crimes against children, no wonder he defends Schultz so much.
Rusty: The overwhelming facts are known about Schultz own "war on women": well, at least one woman. By lying about it, denying, and downplaying, WD is nothing more than an apologist and supporter of domestic violence.
Rusty; WD claims to oppose domestic violence, but when one of his heroes was caught engaging in it, he defended the action. If it had been Hannity instead of Schultz who had engaged in domestic violence, WD would be singing a different tune.
They enthustically lie about those who dare disagree with them by making vile accusations they know aren't true. And there we have WD AGAIN lying about and defending Schultz' domestic violence... all because Schultz tells lies that WD likes on a cable "news" network. Talk about a war on women.
Rusty: As long as the domestic violence is committed by a mouthpiece of the hardline pro-fascistic Left, WD thinks it is great. He has already defended and supported it many times.
WD: "The individual making the accusation is the one that needs to present the proof".
Funny... this contradicts directly your slandering of Bush as a "war criminal". Again and again you use the dead silence of the UN (lack of resolutions, proclamations, etc) as evidence for Bush's guilt, and again and again you say that one must assume Bush is a (haha) "war criminal", and offer proof otherwise to make him innocent.
[Dervish Sanders said] "A zygote/fetus isn't a human being."
It is. You have no idea what you are talking about, and from this it is clear that you know nothing of human biology and development. Either that, or you are so blinded with hatred, you are like the illogical racists who said Black people were not human beings. Your hatred and illogic is known on this subject, from when you argued that born US citizen, free of the womb, can be killed at a whim if the killer declares it to be an 'abortion'.
"You're a sick pathetic liar. I've defended it [domestic violence] zero times".
You have lied about and defended the wife-beater Schultz so many times here. It is far more than zero, but probably less than a dozen. I am sure you are going to lie about and justify Schultz's actions many more times here.
[Dervish Sanders said] "Also, fascism is Rightwing. by definition Leftwingers can't be fascists".
Many leftwingers are fascists, including Hugo Chavez and Pol Pot. Your definition is self-serving and imaginary. Here is the real definition: "often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition". ... one that fits left-wing tyrants no less than right-wing ones.
And you so strongly embrace parts of it. Why, in recent messages you advocated "forcible suppression of opposition" by advocating censorship of people who criticize those in power if they belong to organizations, or have more money than you like. A perfect example of your views on the First Amendment (in opposition to it) being perfectly fascist.
Rusty informed us: "I'm here saying Ed Shultz was charged with domestic violence by his ex-wife....I'm here saying his ex-wife went to court and had a restraining order issued against him because she feared his alcohol fueled rages".
But because Schultz lies on the teevee in favor of causes WD likes, he will probably many more times deny the obvious. If it were Limbaugh that did what Schultz did, we'd get several messages from WD about Limbaugh's war on women.
Thanks for proving, Rusty, that to WD, it doesn't matter if someone rapes children, beats his wife, or wants to see the Israelis (specifically Jewish ones) wiped out.... it's all fine if the person has a "D" after his name. Especially if he believes insane stuff about George W. Bush.
WD said: "Typo Correction (so dmarks doesn't flame me for it, as he has a habit of doing).."
Actually, spelling flames are your sole dominion. You did one against me in the last week or so.
Rusty: Thanks for sticking to the facts. And true to my prediction. WD is defending domestic violence again. And again. And again. You and I know the only thing that would stop WD from supporting Schultz' wife beating. That would be if Schultz became a Republican. Then WD would sing a different tune.
WD said: "You have no idea if Ed Schultz beat his wife or not".
I know he did. But since he is on your side, you again, in your most recent comment, deny-and-defend.
[Dervish Sanders said] "If he were a Republican you'd be singing a different tune".
No, I would condemn him just as equally. There is no evidence that I give someone a free pass on anything like this because they are on "my side". I defy you to come up with one example. But you won't. But there is plenty of evidence that you do this, yourself.
Rusty said: Yet WD,now known as "that greasy bastard", supports wife beating.
You state the obvious. You know, sometimes such things don't need to be said. But maybe just maybe this will sink in with WD sometime. After the hundredth time of stating the facts to him. Now watch for yet another "deny and defend" comment from WD.
[Rusty Shackelford said] "that could explain his acceptance of all sorts of diviant behavior.Creepy guy,that WD....oops,I mean Greasy Bastard".
Well, previously, he did lie about and defend Scott Ritter's "Sanduskyish" behavior. By the way, as for Sandusky, apparently he was a Republican. However, I strongly condemn him. Very strongly. No, I won't lie about him and excuses his behavior because he is supposedly on "my side" politically.
[Dervish Sanders said] "I've pointed out scores of your lies. However, the one I was referring to was your lie about me defending and supporting child sex abuse and wife beating".
You did, many times. If you have stopped, then it is great, and we can move on. But no doubt you will lie about Schultz, which has the effect of defending him.
[Dervish Sanders said] "Also, Scott Ritter told the truth about Iraq being disarmed. The proof is that no WMD was found after Saddam's regime was overthrown".
The proof that he lied is that WMD were indeed found after Saddam was overthrown. I provided you the detailed link, which you acknowledged... fudged with a sort of yeah there were WMD but not enough sort of logic.
[Dervish Sanders said] "Even George W. bush confirmed that no WMD was found".
I'm not referring to what WMD said. I am referring to what was actually found in Iraq.
[Dervish Sanders said] it's the lying about me "supporting and defending" sex crimes or domestic violence.
OK, now that you have stopped defending it, I am looking forward to you joining Rusty and myself in condemning what Schultz did, which is documented in a court of law. As for the other names you mention, there's no proof in court records, like there is for Schultz. Rusty provided this. But, in support of what Schultz did, you lie about it and defend it. Or you have been up to this point. If you have decided to stop now, then fine.
Re: Ed Schultz: From http://publicsearch.ndcourts.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=203281 (A government site).
"11/02/1995 Converted Event Codes Doc ID# 72 (EXP01 ) EX PARTE TEMPORARY PROTECTION ORDER (CC TO CC SHER. & FGO. PD) 11/02/1995 Application Doc ID# 71 APPLICATION FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROTECTION ORDER "
I can't see how you, WD, can lie about this and thus defend and support Schultz' actions. If there is any such documentation about George W. Bush, show it to me. Otherwise, you and I both know you have made it up for some sort of rhetorical point.
Anyway, back on subject. Ed would beat her up [Michelle Malkin]. Because she's a woman and all. That's the kind of guy he is.
If it were the MTV "Celebrity Deathmatch", Schultz would notice his wife in the audience, and jump out of the ring and proceed to beat her to a gross Claymation pulp, leaving Michelle all alone in the ring.
WD: You aren't fooling anyone on the Schultz wife beating denials.
[Willis Hart said] "Schultz's wife's word doesn't constitute evidence, wd?"
As WD traces this back to a "right-wing lie", i guess that makes the woman Schultz assaulted a right-wing liar. Since this is where the information came from, after all. She's probably a dirty evil plutocrat, to boot!
Shhh. WD is riding high in a whirlwind of his own lies. Cold hard facts like these, Will, have no place in his world. ["cold hard facts" is a reference to Willis Hart saying "According to Free Republic, Mr. Schultz's wife applied for a domestic violence protection order on November 11, 1995. I guess that you can research it by going to this site - http://publicsearch.ndcourts.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=203281"].
Good man? You've got to be kidding. [re Dervish Sanders saying "Unsubstantiated rumors and smears are what dmarks and Will apparently believe equate to cold hard facts. I guess that's enough when you have as much irrational hatred for a person as dmarks and Will have for Ed Schultz... a good man who just happens to have a different perspective on politics than them"].
| Posts that link here [SWTD #307] Is There Evidence Supporting The Allegation That Ed Schultz Is A Wife Beater? 8/18/2015. |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are not moderated.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.