apevol
KDKWKDJDKAJFBAJFJW D JAKFJSJSHF
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2012
- Messages
- 24,620
- Likes
- 18,461
Now you think about what you've just typed here and tell me convince me that people that would try to make anything out of a 70 year old photo should be taken seriously.I am reserving judgment and merely saying it's not good optics. You can disagree all you want, but you apparently don't understand the world you live in. A good fraction of the country is going to look at that and conclude negative things about JJ, so I would say that this is indisputably "not a good look."
I am reserving judgment and merely saying it's not good optics. You can disagree all you want, but you apparently don't understand the world you live in. A good fraction of the country is going to look at that and conclude negative things about JJ, so I would say that this is indisputably "not a good look."
Now you think about what you've just typed here and tell me convince me that people that would try to make anything out of a 70 year old photo should be taken seriously.
What is there to explain? Why should he explain anything? Would a "I was curious about what was going on" suffice as an explication or is an apology in order?