David "Stumpy" Pein Caught Lying...

[Ben Holmes]

Stumpy Pein is spanked for his silly assertion... I predict that he
will slink away to the censored forum, and ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to defend
his outrageous and unsupportable lie.


> The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME**
> for simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e.,
> that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's
> murders. Geez, what a stump.


You're a GUTLESS liar, David Von Pein.

I certainly DO NOT believe that silly assertion. Nor would *ANY*
honest person.

Even *YOU* certainly DO NOT believe that a police department, no
matter *HOW* corrupt, would intentionally "plot" to frame SOMEONE THEY
KNEW WAS AN INNOCENT MAN.

So tell us David, WHY DID YOU INTENTIONALLY LIE?

Or are you actually STUPID enough to believe that a police department
in America would intentionally "plot" to frame someone they *KNEW* was
completely innocent?

Speak up, moron... let's see if you have any courage... or prefer to
slink back to the censored forum where lies like this aren't
challenged.

Watch as David ABSOLUTELY REFUSES to cite any known case in the United
States where a police department, NO MATTER HOW CORRUPT, intentionally
"plotted" to frame someone they *KNEW* was innocent.

Run coward... RUN!!!

[Bud]

On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 2:15:54 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> Stumpy Pein is spanked for his silly assertion... I predict that he
> will slink away to the censored forum, and ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to defend
> his outrageous and unsupportable lie.
>
>
> > The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME**
> > for simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e.,
> > that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's
> > murders. Geez, what a stump.
>
>
> You're a GUTLESS liar, David Von Pein.
>
> I certainly DO NOT believe that silly assertion. Nor would *ANY*
> honest person.
>
> Even *YOU* certainly DO NOT believe that a police department, no
> matter *HOW* corrupt, would intentionally "plot" to frame SOMEONE THEY
> KNEW WAS AN INNOCENT MAN.
>
> So tell us David, WHY DID YOU INTENTIONALLY LIE?
>
> Or are you actually STUPID enough to believe that a police department
> in America would intentionally "plot" to frame someone they *KNEW* was
> completely innocent?

Can Ben show a case where a police department immediately went to work framing any suspect, guilty or innocent, lurkers?

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 13:50:02 -0700 (PDT), chucksch...@gmail.com
wrote:

> Tiny Dancer keeps setting up those straw men and knocking them down.

It's David's issue, not mine. I merely point it out for the lie that
it is.


> The issue isn't whether police departments have ever framed a man for
> a crime,

Nor did *I* state that this was the issue.

You're creating a strawman because you're too stupid to understand
what the topic is.

You should re-read this post until you understand the relevant issues.


> the issue is whether the DPD framed Oswald for Tippit's murder.

That's not the issue *here*. It's David's lie.

Address David's lie, *THEN* I'll address the framing of Oswald for
both murders.


> On one hand we have forensic evidence, eyewitness evidence, a
> narrative that fits, and points directly to Oswald, etc.

*NONE* of which you'll post or cite for...


> and on the
> other hand we have Tiny Dancer defending his hero Oswald with his
> usual assortment of logical fallacies.


You're a gutless liar, Chucky. David made the claim... he lied.

Clearly *YOU* know it's a lie, because *YOU* refuse to defend it...


> Tiny Dancer needs to make an affirmative case for why the Dallas
> police department apparently decided to give a free pass to someone or
> some group for killing one of their own, JD Tippit.


I don't "need" to do anything other than point out lies by kooks.

It's amusing that you allow David a free pass to tell an obvious lie.


> The burden is on Ben to show why Tippit's co-workers and friends at
> the DPD decided not to go after their old buddy's killer(s). Hundreds
> of men and women on the DPD in 1963, and none of them were apparently
> interested in getting the real cop-killer off the street.
>
>Make your case, Tiny Dancer.

You are absolutely DESPERATE to change the topic, aren't you?

The topic is David's lie that I believe that there's *ANY* police
department in America that would intentionally frame someone they
*KNEW* to be innocent.

I find it funny that you aren't honest enough to address the issue.

Why the cowardice, Chucky?

THE BURDEN IS ON DAVID, AND THOSE OF YOU WHO REFUSE TO STATE THAT
DAVID LIED.

I have no "burden" here...

[Ben Holmes]

Anyone notice that the two believers who have thus far responded have
*BOTH* refused to address the actual issue?

I would chalk it up to Attention Deficit Disorder, but I know that
it's really just dishonesty combined with cowardice.

Everyone *KNOWS* that David made a *stupid* and indefensible
statement, but *NO-ONE* other than a critic is willing to call him on
it.

That fact tells everyone just where the truth is to be found in this
case.

[Ben Holmes]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>
wrote:

>On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 2:15:54 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> Stumpy Pein is spanked for his silly assertion... I predict that he
>> will slink away to the censored forum, and ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to defend
>> his outrageous and unsupportable lie.
>>
>>
>> > The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME**
>> > for simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e.,
>> > that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's
>> > murders. Geez, what a stump.
>>
>>
>> You're a GUTLESS liar, David Von Pein.
>>
>> I certainly DO NOT believe that silly assertion. Nor would *ANY*
>> honest person.
>>
>> Even *YOU* certainly DO NOT believe that a police department, no
>> matter *HOW* corrupt, would intentionally "plot" to frame SOMEONE THEY
>> KNEW WAS AN INNOCENT MAN.
>>
>> So tell us David, WHY DID YOU INTENTIONALLY LIE?
>>
>> Or are you actually STUPID enough to believe that a police department
>> in America would intentionally "plot" to frame someone they *KNEW* was
>> completely innocent?
>
> Can Ben show a case where a police department immediately went to
> work framing any suspect, guilty or innocent, lurkers?

Of course I can.

But before I cite examples, I want a public apology from David, or an
acknowledgement from *YOU* that David lied.

[Bud]

Ben is lying, lurkers. He loves to lie.

[David Von Pein]

On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 2:15:54 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:

Holmes,

Please help me understand the "LIE" I supposedly told, OK?

Does this mean you, Ben, *DON'T* think Oswald was innocent?

And does this mean you *DON'T* think Oswald was framed for both Kennedy's and Tippit's murders?

So, where's the "LIE", Mr. Stump?

[Ben Holmes]

Certainly. You made a claim about "an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for

both JFK's and Tippit's murders."

I certainly DO NOT believe that silly assertion. Nor would *ANY*
honest person.

Even *YOU* certainly DO NOT believe that a police department, no
matter *HOW* corrupt, would intentionally "plot" to frame SOMEONE THEY
KNEW WAS AN INNOCENT MAN.

Now, reread that until you understand... then do your best to document
such a claim.

>Does this mean you, Ben, *DON'T* think Oswald was innocent?

Tut tut tut, David. Perhaps you don't know the new rules around here,
but I don't answer questions if the questioner refuses to answer mine.

In other words, I simply COPY your tactics.

>And does this mean you *DON'T* think Oswald was framed for both Kennedy's and Tippit's murders?

See above.

>So, where's the "LIE", Mr. Stump?

Documented above, as it was in the original response.

[David Von Pein]

On Saturday, October 14, 2017 at 7:04:16 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 14:55:17 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 2:15:54 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
> >> Stumpy Pein is spanked for his silly assertion... I predict that he
> >> will slink away to the censored forum, and ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to defend
> >> his outrageous and unsupportable lie.
> >>
> >>
> >> > The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME**
> >> > for simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e.,
> >> > that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's
> >> > murders. Geez, what a stump.
> >>
> >>
> >> You're a GUTLESS liar, David Von Pein.
> >>
> >> I certainly DO NOT believe that silly assertion. Nor would *ANY*
> >> honest person.
> >>

You're the liar, Holmes. Because, based on all your posts over the years, you most certainly DO believe Oswald was "INNOCENT", AND you most certainly DO believe that Oswald was "FRAMED" for BOTH murders he committed on 11/22/63.

So there is no DVP lie here. Never was. (Of course, we all knew that was the case in the first place. You just love to convolute things---as per usual.)

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 17:39:25 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein

<davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, October 14, 2017 at 7:04:16 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 14:55:17 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein
>> <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 2:15:54 PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> >> Stumpy Pein is spanked for his silly assertion... I predict that he
>> >> will slink away to the censored forum, and ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to defend
>> >> his outrageous and unsupportable lie.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME**
>> >> > for simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e.,
>> >> > that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's
>> >> > murders. Geez, what a stump.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> You're a GUTLESS liar, David Von Pein.
>> >>
>> >> I certainly DO NOT believe that silly assertion. Nor would *ANY*
>> >> honest person.
>> >>
>
> You're the liar, Holmes. Because, based on all your posts over the
> years, you most certainly DO believe Oswald was "INNOCENT", AND you
> most certainly DO believe that Oswald was "FRAMED" for BOTH murders he
> committed on 11/22/63.
>
> So there is no DVP lie here. Never was. (Of course, we all knew that
> was the case in the first place. You just love to convolute
> things---as per usual.)

I've been specific enough for any *honest* person to follow what I
stated, but you're clearly a moron... so I'm going to repeat it in
different words...

You claimed that *I* believed that the DPD, or *ANY* police department
for that matter, would intentionally "plot" to frame someone they
*KNEW* was innocent.

To "plot" means that at least *TWO* police officers, and perhaps
more... *KNEW* that someone was innocent, yet conspired with others to
frame that innocent person.

In other words, you're accusing those who work the hardest for justice
in America of intentionally being UN-just.

There's never been a problem with *ANYONE* believing that police will
"plot" to "frame" a suspect that they believe is guilty, thinking that
they are making justice "work" easier... I've already stated that I
can point to real examples of this.

But *YOU* have not, AND NEVER WILL offer any supporting example where
police actually *plotted* to frame someone they *KNEW* was innocent.

You can't... because *YOU* are too stupid to realize just how dumb
your assertion was.

The liar is *YOU*, David... and the *PROOF* is the fact that you
cannot give a supporting example of this happening ANYWHERE in
America.

Yet you accuse me of "believing" it, despite no evidence whatsoever...

JUST HOW STUPID ARE YOU, DAVID?

I've long had my suspicions of your IQ being just a tad lower than
average, but your inability to understand my points here go a long way
to supporting it.

[David Von Pein]

You sure are acting like a Super Stump today. I never once said *anything* about the "DPD" specifically. You decided to add in that part of the narrative yourself. Here's what I said YOU believe (and you definitely DO believe this, unless all your posts since the Internet was invented are fraudulent)----

"Holmes is actually berating ME for simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes—i.e., that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's murders." -- DVP

YOU think Oswald was INNOCENT.

And:

YOU think Oswald was FRAMED by somebody---and I didn't specifically mention the "DPD" as you asserted I did. But, anyway, you certainly think Oswald was innocent of killing JFK & JDT and was framed for those murders. Therefore, there is no DVP lie. You just changed the context of my quote so that you could *pretend* I told a lie. A pathetic maneuver by Slimeball Holmes, to be sure. But we'd expect nothing less from a Super Scumbag like Benny Holmes, would we?

> JUST HOW STUPID ARE YOU, DAVID?
>
> I've long had my suspicions of your IQ being just a tad lower than
> average, but your inability to understand my points here go a long way
> to supporting it.
>

And your IQ seems to rival that of cold melba toast.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 19:24:32 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein

Nor did I.

You're lying again. Here's the original again:

**************************************************************
>>>>Is that the way to realistically approach a murder case? Is it reasonable
>>>>to think that many, many people "plotted" to frame an innocent man named
>>>>Oswald by planting several pieces of evidence favoring his guilt?
>>>
>>> The idea that the DPD intentionally "plotted" to frame an innocent man
>>> is a *very* dishonest assertion by David.
>>
>> That's not his assertion, asshole, it's the assertion of Oswald
>> Lovers like yourself. Read for comprehension.

> Exactly, Chuck. The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME** for

> simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e., that an
> INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's murders. Geez,
> what a stump.

****************************************************************

You *meant* the DPD - because they were the only ones who were
involved with Oswald...

So it *WAS* you who specified the DPD. There were the ONLY ones who
could have "plotted" to frame Oswald by planting evidence. It was *ME*
who widened it to any police department in America in my challenge to
you to support your lie.

So tell us David "Stumpy" Pein - WHY ARE YOU FLAGRANTLY LYING AGAIN?>

> You decided to add in that
> part of the narrative yourself. Here's what I said YOU believe (and
> you definitely DO believe this, unless all your posts since the
> Internet was invented are fraudulent)----
>
>"Holmes is actually berating ME for simply pointing out something
> that HE HIMSELF believes—i.e., that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for
> both JFK's and Tippit's murders." -- DVP

You left out part of your statement... quite dishonest of you, wasn't
it? I included it above.

>YOU think Oswald was INNOCENT.

You merely repeat your lie.

Now, BACK UP YOUR LIE WITH A CITATION TO *ANY* POLICE DEPARTMENT IN
AMERICA ACTUALLY "PLOTTING" TO FRAME SOMEONE THEY *KNOW* IS INNOCENT.

If you cannot, then RETRACT YOUR LIE - and stop trying to defend the
indefensible.

Gutless coward!

[David Von Pein]

Liar. You don't even remember what you said earlier today, you goof. ....

Stump Holmes said:

"The idea that ****the DPD**** intentionally "plotted" to frame an innocent man is a *very* dishonest assertion by David."

> You're lying again. Here's the original again:
>
> **************************************************************
> >>>>Is that the way to realistically approach a murder case? Is it reasonable
> >>>>to think that many, many people "plotted" to frame an innocent man named
> >>>>Oswald by planting several pieces of evidence favoring his guilt?
> >>>
> >>> The idea that the DPD intentionally "plotted" to frame an innocent man
> >>> is a *very* dishonest assertion by David.
> >>
> >> That's not his assertion, asshole, it's the assertion of Oswald
> >> Lovers like yourself. Read for comprehension.
>
> > Exactly, Chuck. The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME** for
> > simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e., that an
> > INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's murders. Geez,
> > what a stump.
> ****************************************************************
>
> You *meant* the DPD - because they were the only ones who were
> involved with Oswald...
>

> So it *WAS* you who specified the DPD. The[y] were the ONLY ones who

> could have "plotted" to frame Oswald by planting evidence.

So you *DO* think the DPD framed Oswald by planting evidence against him, right? (Of course you do, we all know that. Otherwise, your poster boy LHO is guilty, and you think he's snow-white innocent.)

Wanna go around again, Benny, by pretending that this statement of mine is a "lie", when everybody knows it isn't?....

"Holmes is actually berating ME for simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes—i.e., that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's murders. Geez, what a stump." -- DVP

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 21:13:44 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein

>Liar...


You're lying again, David.

You cannot win a debate with lies...

>> You're lying again. Here's the original again:
>>
>> **************************************************************
>> >>>>Is that the way to realistically approach a murder case? Is it reasonable
>> >>>>to think that many, many people "plotted" to frame an innocent man named
>> >>>>Oswald by planting several pieces of evidence favoring his guilt?
>> >>>
>> >>> The idea that the DPD intentionally "plotted" to frame an innocent man
>> >>> is a *very* dishonest assertion by David.
>> >>
>> >> That's not his assertion, asshole, it's the assertion of Oswald
>> >> Lovers like yourself. Read for comprehension.
>>
>> > Exactly, Chuck. The stump named Holmes is actually berating **ME** for
>> > simply pointing out something that HE HIMSELF believes---i.e., that an
>> > INNOCENT Oswald was framed for both JFK's and Tippit's murders. Geez,
>> > what a stump.
>> ****************************************************************
>>
>> You *meant* the DPD - because they were the only ones who were
>> involved with Oswald...
>>
>> So it *WAS* you who specified the DPD. The[y] were the ONLY ones who
>> could have "plotted" to frame Oswald by planting evidence.
>
> So you *DO* think the DPD framed Oswald by planting evidence against
> him, right? (Of course you do, we all know that. Otherwise, your
> poster boy LHO is guilty, and you think he's snow-white innocent.)

This isn't the topic, David... I can well understand why you want to
change the topic.

You've lost, and you're desperate to regain a little bit of
self-respect.

> Wanna go around again, Benny, by pretending that this statement of
> mine is a "lie", when everybody knows it isn't?....

You lied... and the proof that you lied is the fact that you refuse to
provide *ANY* example of *ANY* police department in America, no matter
HOW corrupt, that "plotted" to frame someone they *KNEW* was innocent.

Keep running, and I'll simply keep bringing it up.

> "Holmes is actually berating ME for simply pointing out something
> that HE HIMSELF believes—i.e., that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for
> both JFK's and Tippit's murders. Geez, what a stump." -- DVP

You're a liar, David.

>> It was *ME*
>> who widened it to any police department in America in my challenge to
>> you to support your lie.
>>
>> So tell us David "Stumpy" Pein - WHY ARE YOU FLAGRANTLY LYING AGAIN?>
>>
>>
>> > You decided to add in that
>> > part of the narrative yourself. Here's what I said YOU believe (and
>> > you definitely DO believe this, unless all your posts since the
>> > Internet was invented are fraudulent)----
>> >
>> >"Holmes is actually berating ME for simply pointing out something
>> > that HE HIMSELF believes—i.e., that an INNOCENT Oswald was framed for
>> > both JFK's and Tippit's murders." -- DVP
>>
>>
>> You left out part of your statement... quite dishonest of you, wasn't
>> it? I included it above.

Anyone notice that David didn't have a single thing to say about his
intentional misrepresentation by omission?

>> >YOU think Oswald was INNOCENT.
>>
>>
>> You merely repeat your lie.
>>
>> Now, BACK UP YOUR LIE WITH A CITATION TO *ANY* POLICE DEPARTMENT IN
>> AMERICA ACTUALLY "PLOTTING" TO FRAME SOMEONE THEY *KNOW* IS INNOCENT.
>>
>> If you cannot, then RETRACT YOUR LIE - and stop trying to defend the
>> indefensible.
>>
>> Gutless coward!

And clearly, David "Stumpy" Pein is exactly this... a gutless coward
who refuses to back up what he says, and refuses to retract it.

[David Von Pein]

Incredible. You need help, Mr. Convoluted. Lots of it.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 10:43:17 -0700 (PDT), David Von Pein

This is your answer???

You RUN from every point raised, ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to provide any
example in history of an American police department "plotting" to
frame someone they *KNOW* is innocent - and simply run away!!!?

Why the cowardice, David?

WHY CAN'T YOU SUPPORT YOUR NONSENSICAL ASSERTIONS???

Low IQ may explain some of this... but there's clearly a wee bit of
dishonesty involved as well.

Right stumpy?

[Mark Ulrik]

Framing an innocent (but perhaps presumed guilty) person and framing someone you know is innocent are not equal concepts, but it's good to know there are limits to your paranoia.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 02:03:11 -0700 (PDT), Mark Ulrik <m...@xml.dk>
wrote:

It's truly amusing that David "Stumpy" Pein, "Dud" and Chucky Cheese
all refuse to acknowledge this...

Yet instead of pointing this out, you *AGREE* with me, then claim that
*I'm* paranoid.

Honesty isn't one of your traits, is it Mark?

[Mark Ulrik]

Huh? But you're clearly the one who doesn't understand the difference.

> Yet instead of pointing this out, you *AGREE* with me, then claim that
> *I'm* paranoid.

Because you are, although apparently not so much about the role of the DPD.

> Honesty isn't one of your traits, is it Mark?

Sadly, I was being completely honest.

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 06:48:58 -0700 (PDT), Mark Ulrik <m...@xml.dk>

How STUPID of you - I'm the first one to POINT IT OUT!

I've been repeatedly pointing this out, and EVERYONE ELSE has been
running from it. *YOU* are the first person to acknowledge it, then
you turn around and claim that *I* don't "understand" the
difference!!!

WHAT A DISHONEST LYING MORON YOU ARE!!!

>> Yet instead of pointing this out, you *AGREE* with me, then claim that
>> *I'm* paranoid.
>
>Because you are, although apparently not so much about the role of the DPD.

You'll *never* provide evidence for your claim that would stand up to
any honest person.

>> Honesty isn't one of your traits, is it Mark?
>
>Sadly, I was being completely honest.

Provably false.

[Ben Holmes]

On Sat, 14 Oct 2017 14:34:22 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

> Ben is lying...


Empty claim. I live just 60 miles from a case so famous that it has
it's own Wikipedia entry.

[Bud]

Ben lives near OJ, lurkers?

[Ben Holmes]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 15:16:28 -0700 (PDT), Bud <sirs...@fast.net>

OJ isn't the case. The police *CERTAINLY* didn't think that O.J. was
innocent, nor do I believe that the police "framed" him.