[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

I do understand....you say there is more than one lawsuit other than the one I mentioned....I’ve asked you to tell me what they are but you seem to have a problem with an answer...

I mean if YOU can’t understand basic language don’t try and put it back on me....I’m still waiting for an answer.

Again, in the words of Jet, do your research if you're going to join a discussion.

I'm not your PA. Maybe Jet could oblige with their obligatory Daily Mail links?

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

What part of this response is me saying she didn't file a lawsuit about the publishing of her father's letter?

My response was illustrating Meghan has and is pursuing lawsuits (note the plural) against publications for printing lies about her. Quite the opposite to Jet claiming she wasn't.

I didn't say she wasn't, I said I hadn't heard of any other lawsuit. Big difference. You just make things up as you go along and think no one notices.

As I can't find anything about another lawsuit, its not too much to ask for a source as you claim you know there is one. I'd like to read about it, its not a trick question. You accused me of not giving sources which was an outright lie, so what is your problem?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

I didn't say she wasn't, I said I hadn't heard of any other lawsuit. Big difference. You just make things up as you go along and think no one notices.

As I can't find anything about another lawsuit, its not too much to ask for a source as you claim you know there is one. I'd like to read about it, its not a trick question. You accused me of not giving sources which was an outright lie, so what is your problem?

No. I accused you of either refusing to share so called non-tabloid sources OR providing sources which were just tabloids. So far you're proving me right.

Yet again, you've provided us with another Daily Mail link. Look beyond the tabloids and you will find actual news.

[DouglasS]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Again, in the words of Jet, do your research if you're going to join a discussion.

I'm not your PA. Maybe Jet could oblige with their obligatory Daily Mail links?

She made her point and you essentially challenged her by stating there is more than one lawsuit without any evidence. She gave you ample opportunities to actually support your claims and what the others are and you haven’t done so, you can’t just tell her to research your point without explaining the point. If anything it should be you posting the evidence of your apparent research / you doing research. It appears to be just you deflecting when challenged?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by DouglasS

She made her point and you essentially challenged her

She challenged my point and accused me of saying something I did not.

Easy mistake to make though when you dive in just to play contrary Mary when you see my username in a thread.

You're forgiven.

[DouglasS]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

She challenged my point and accused me of saying something I did not.

Easy mistake to make though when you dive in just to play contrary Mary when you see my username in a thread.

You're forgiven.

You’re still deflecting from the lawsuit challenge because you haven’t got the evidence/facts

Why on earth would I care about your username? I’ve got better things going on in my life than to be thinking about you Marsh

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by DouglasS

She made her point and you essentially challenged her by stating there is more than one lawsuit without any evidence. She gave you ample opportunities to actually support your claims and what the others are and you haven’t done so, you can’t just tell her to research your point without explaining the point. If anything it should be you posting the evidence of your apparent research / you doing research. It appears to be just you deflecting when challenged?

Originally Posted by DouglasS

You’re still deflecting from the lawsuit challenge because you haven’t got the evidence/facts

Why on earth would I care about your username? I’ve got better things going on in my life than to be thinking about you Marsh

Sure thing Jack.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

No. I accused you of either refusing to share so called non-tabloid sources OR providing sources which were just tabloids. So far you're proving me right.

Yet again, you've provided us with another Daily Mail link. Look beyond the tabloids and you will find actual news.

Deflect, deflect deflect. You talk poppycock Marsh. You're losing the plot, take a break.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Deflect, deflect deflect. You talk poppycock Marsh. You're losing the plot, take a break.

I can see how that might appear to someone who finds it mentally taxing to read something other than the Daily Mail.

You're certainly mirroring tabloid spin with your own complete allergy to the truth suddenly being MY problem.

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

She challenged my point and accused me of saying something I did not

Err...no I didn’t. I didn’t accuse you of anything ...You said there was more than one lawsuit other than the one I had mentioned and you can’t seem to back it up....
I’m accusing you now of making it up if you cannot back your statement up...it’s not difficult...

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by DouglasS

She made her point and you essentially challenged her by stating there is more than one lawsuit without any evidence. She gave you ample opportunities to actually support your claims and what the others are and you haven’t done so, you can’t just tell her to research your point without explaining the point. If anything it should be you posting the evidence of your apparent research / you doing research. It appears to be just you deflecting when challenged?

Thank you DouglasS....

[Good King Glennceslas]

The irony when no one can explain why they feel they have the right to express such hatred behind their keyboards.

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I can see how that might appear to someone who finds it mentally taxing to read something other than the Daily Mail.

You're certainly mirroring tabloid spin with your own complete allergy to the truth suddenly being MY problem.

You’re getting personal now....it’s a natural reaction

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

The irony when no one can explain why they feel they have the right to express such hatred behind their keyboards.

There is no hatred...dislike but no hatred

[Good King Glennceslas]

There’s definitely hatred. Irrational jealous hatred

[LukeB]

Originally Posted by Amy Jade

The press are treating her the same horrible way they treated our beautiful Princess Diana.

the only difference is with social media existing and the racist abuse she has received

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by LukeB

the only difference is the racist abuse Meghan has received

What racist abuse? Please elaborate.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

You’re getting personal now....it’s a natural reaction

Keep those blinkers on.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

I can see how that might appear to someone who finds it mentally taxing to read something other than the Daily Mail.

You're certainly mirroring tabloid spin with your own complete allergy to the truth suddenly being MY problem.

You just get sillier with every post Marsh.

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by jet

You just get sillier with every post Marsh.

It’s embarrassing..

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

You just get sillier with every post Marsh.

Shall I fake surprise that you find rational, logical facts silly and hard to comprehend?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

The irony when no one can explain why they feel they have the right to express such hatred behind their keyboards.

Ikr.

[jet]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

It’s embarrassing..

It really is.

[Liam-]

It feels like I’ve been bashing my head against a wall reading the past few pages

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

It really is.

Don't waste your shame on me, I'm not the middle aged man fixated on a Royal bride and tabloid magazines aimed at teenage girls.