Did they screech a lot about mansplaining? Please tell me they did.That was my exact experience with the one I had to deal with. HR contacted me twice a week about the latest insanely false accusations she had filed against her co-workers. She wanted to spent all day Tweeting and posting on cat websites and doing zero work. She refused to take the medicine she was prescribed for her bipolar disorder. She had frequent, loud, disruptive outbursts. It was seven weeks of hell before she was fired. Of course, she threatened to sue, but never did, doubtless because no lawyer would take her worthless case on contingency.
I'd need to see the experiment, but unless they had four groups of cows (one painted black, one painted white, one unpainted, one striped) it wouldn't be very rigorous since the flies could merely be avoiding the paint.
No. But she did have several striking similarities to John, including a falsified resume. She claimed to be an expert in several software applications that we used; in two of them she couldn't even open the program and create a new document.Did they screech a lot about mansplaining? Please tell me they did.
Jesus christ you screeching tranny.
Glad to see our obligatory daily/weekly mention of gubergaber, thanks John!
Has there ever been a flynt/jarbo victim fight club over gaymergate since they both are claiming to be patient zero?Glad to see our obligatory daily/weekly mention of gubergaber, thanks John!
Who is he kidding........he's always playing with semen.
John you ignorant fuck. The HRC was founded as a gay & lesbian rights org. Their focus was on raising campaign money for politicians who openly supported LGB rights and would push for anti-discrimination policies at the state and federal level. They also worked to defeat idiots like Jesse Helms who were actively opposing bills that would provide federal funding for AIDS research and treatment.
I thought the same thing. Is he remembering the Crucible? Does the Satan-as-witness thing happen in the play?Unsurprisingly, John is wrong. There were all kinds of silly (to us) forms of evidence used in the Salem witch trials, but "testimony from Satan speaking to them from the demon world" was not one of them.
And even if they did, how does that invalidate Giuliani's point? The right to know and confront your accuser is one of the most bedrock-deep principles in American jurisprudence. You know who loves anonymous and unchallengeable accusations? Dictatorships and corrupt shitholes. And the Democrats in the House, apparently.
John is a very stupid person, with an idiot's command of general knowledge. If he remembers this "fact" from anywhere, it's probably a badly jumbled version of something that happened in a video game.I thought the same thing. Is he remembering the Crucible? Does the Satan-as-witness thing happen in the play?