Jon Letendre

Now you added gaslighting psychopath. Nice, Michael.

Not at all. Go ahead and lie more, Loser.

I have never had any problem, Junkie. Nice total imagination smear, there.

Don't push the gutter life on others, Drunk. You don't need another to toke-up, anyway, Junkie. Have at it.

Maybe ask someone else.

Nope. But nice try, Drunk and Crack Fiend. I was at college, then a software company, then a landlord, then I raised children, while you burned and inhaled a lot of ... something, we will never know exactly what was in it. Sorry, no drugs or drinking for me. I have always been focused and healthy.

Do you have any neurons left, after all the decades of crank and crack or whatever it was they told you were getting?

But don't exaggerate like that, I will be fine. I have seen this before and already knew you were a very small person about some things. You will continue to smear like a scummy very small person and then change the subject, it just is you, your way. I accept it. I'm not hurt at all, why would your shortcomings hurt me? That's cute.

Yeah. You are pretty dumb and unfair.

And it is ok that there are no such people for you to cite. I accept that you will readily smear, then refuse to name one specific example of your smear, then pretend nothing happened.

You meme like shit. Comparatively, the left makes funny memes.

I accept that you will not address the points I made against an obviously fake video beyond your rhetorical "that's enough would to build a house" put-down.

That is a great statement. I did provide much, much more, it is here. I only recall getting nasty with people who refused to discuss and went straight to belittling me personally. If I bullied anyone who was going about like you do above, making real discussion without the personal, then I want to sincerely apologize to them. Who was it? I honestly cannot recall any.

No, I cited many things that are wrong with that video. And I have since seen many other people noticed the same things. You have not addressed them, but only cast doubt on all of it, you responded, "that's enough would to build a house." You don't see what we see, so we must be cliquish and shallow, you went there seamlessly.

Some of her doubles are but certainly not the original woman. I don't need to be taken on faith about that, I only objected when dumb people who haven't looked into it yet knee-jerk their thoughtless rejection, because it sounds like a "conspiracy theory" and offer only put-downs. I have offered much research and evidence on Ruth. I objected to the assholes who demonstrably know nothing, don't even try, but only come with the "you people" put-down. You face it all the time and know exactly what I mean. I did not bully anyone for not right away believing what I know about Ruth, I only bull