Katie Hopkins

[noseall]

I wonder what Nosenout makes of this tweet. Looks like another offer..

There was only one offer. You think that repeating the same offer means that it becomes several offers?

Untitled

• noseall
• 17 Jan 2015
• 3

 

[noseall]

Three posts all contradicting each other and a picture of him wetting his pants again. Being wrong is really getting to you. It’s odd, it must happen all the time.

I’ve provided the tweet where Monroe asked for an apology. Others have seen it and commented.

You are still going with a tweet, made without legal advice as being a part 36 complaint open offer. But all the others aren’t.

It’s simply hilarious.. and wrong.

No.

You haven't explained that when questioned about this supposed 'rapid retraction', you referred to in Judgement paragraphs 19 - 21. You were quite succinct and specific in posts # 239, 241, 243, 248 and 285. Even making reference to the timeline (2.5 months), the judgement comments, the 5k/apology/retraction etc. I have shown you the posts. Nowhere do you mention the later bullshít.

Later in the thread, you must have a realisation that others have actually read the Judgement (properly) and that a 2.5 month period isn't a rapid retraction, and start making up lies in earnest. You then start referring to paragraph 17, and in particular a tweet where JM asks KH to take down a tweet. You somehow claim that this is a request for an apology (lies) and that it is an offer, bizarrely (lies).


So which is it? Were you lying earlier in the thread or are you lying now. Just explain the glaring fugging disparity in your lies, please?

 

[noseall]

Incidentally you still haven't shown a link, an internet hit, a Judgement, a Judge, a commentator or human being on the planet making reference to this....Ms Monroe tweeted again at 7.36pm: “I’m asking you nicely to please delete this lie Katie, and if I have to ask again it will be through my lawyer.” ...as being an offer from JM. Please show someone, ANYONE other than yourself refer to it as an offer, please?

He can't, he won't.

 

[motorbiking]

I’ve explained dozens of times. You refuse to accept the facts. Now you are refusing to set out the arguments you are attempting to rely on.

Go on give it a go. Tweet 17,3 is not an offer, tweet 17,4 is an open offer.

Explain.

 

[noseall]

I’ve explained dozens of times.

No you haven't. You are avoiding YOUR OWN posts like the plague.

Let's try again.

I asked you to explain (in my post #238) about a supposed 'rapid retraction'.

In reply, i.e. posts #239, 241, 243, 248, and 285 you discuss the Judgement and each time you refer to paragraphs 19 - 21 (of the judgement). You also mention elements of the offer, i.e. £5k/donation/apology etc. You even call me dumb for not reading paragraphs 19 - 21 of the judgement.

You hammer it home and say read 19 - 21 again for this supposed rapid retraction. Guess what, it isn't there. You even agree with MNW67 when he says 'is 2.5 months rapid?'
'Yep' you say.
And then in post #285 you are there again i.e. 'It will also help you with the time line. 7:20 the tweet, 8:14 the claim. (incl 5k)'

So I look at these paragraphs and nowhere does it say that the offer was rapidly retracted and certainly not after 38 minutes. Nor will you find it. What it does say is that the offer was retracted on the 4th August, 2.5 months after being first tweeted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then in post #303 your story changes and you back peddle to P. 17 where JM asks KH to remove a tweet. Remarkably and bizarrely you claim that she asks for an apolgy (lies) and is making an offer (lies) an that this is where you hallucinated your offer.



So which lies are you sticking with boyo? Both can't be true.

 

[noseall]

Incidentally you still haven't shown a link, an internet hit, a Judgement, a Judge, a commentator or human being on the planet making reference to this....Ms Monroe tweeted again at 7.36pm: “I’m asking you nicely to please delete this lie Katie, and if I have to ask again it will be through my lawyer.” ...as being an offer from JM. Please show someone, ANYONE other than yourself refer to it as an offer, please?

He can't, he won't.

 

[noseall]

More blatant MBK lying...

I've provided the tweet Post 595

Nonsense. I'm only interested why you chose to lie and all in the same post....

WRONG

you've literally just made up your own version. Here is the correct version again:

(1) At 7.20pm Ms Hopkins posted the first tweet of which Ms Monroe complains (“The First Tweet”). It was in these words: “@MsJackMonroe scrawled on any memorials recently? Vandalised the memory of those who fought for your freedom. Grandma got any more medals?”
(2) At 7.33pm Ms Monroe tweeted in these terms: “I have NEVER ‘scrawled on a memorial’. Brother in the RAF. Dad was a Para in the Falklands. You’re a piece of s**t.” (With a screenshot to the First Tweet)
(3) Ms Monroe tweeted again at 7.36pm: “I’m asking you nicely to please delete this lie Katie, and if I have to ask again it will be through my lawyer.” (With a link to the First Tweet)
(4) At 8.14pm Ms Monroe tweeted again, this time using Ms Hopkins’ Twitter handle: “Dear @KTHopkins, public apology +£5k to migrant rescue & I won’t sue. It’ll be cheaper for you and v. satisfying for me.”
(6) At 9.47pm Ms Hopkins posted the second tweet of which Ms Monroe complains (“the Second Tweet”). It was in these terms:“Can someone explain to me - in 10 words or less - the difference between irritant @PennyRed and social anthrax @jack Monroe.”
(7) At some point that evening, I infer about this time, Ms Hopkins blocked Ms Monroe. That prevented Ms Monroe from communicating with her via Twitter.
(8) Later on 18 May 2015 the Claimant published the following on Twitter: “BA_DA_BOOM! It lies! It smears! It’s wrong! It panics! It blocks! It’s @KTHopkins everyone!” (With six pictures of a chicken)
(9) At 22:30 on 18 May 2015 the Claimant published the following on Twitter: “Gin o clock. Cheers. God isn’t it good sweet justice when a poisonous bully gets shown up for what it is and runs runs runs away.”

This is from the judgement not your made up version.

Your version corrected below:

Tweet 1: Hopkins to Monroe
Tweet 2: Monroe reply to Hopkins saying no she had not abd would not deface memorials
Tweet 2.1: Monroe reply to Hopkins demanding an apology
"Tweet 4": Monroe to Hopkins asking for money to charity.
"Tweet 3": Hopkins to Monroe: another poisonous tweet

It makes a difference.
Click to expand...

You state quite clearly that in JM's second post (2.1 you labelled it) that 'Monroe to Hopkins demanding an apology'. I see no demand for an apology here, do you? Read your own text above.

Ms Monroe tweeted again at 7.36pm: “I’m asking you nicely to please delete this lie Katie, and if I have to ask again it will be through my lawyer.” (With a link to the First Tweet)

 

[noseall]

You are just posting the same boll@x over and over again.

Why are you avoiding addressing you own posts. Either you lied in the posts I mentioned or you are lying now. You have yet to explain?

 

[noseall]

You are just posting the same boll@x over and over again.

Ok then try this.

Did Monroe retract her offer (£5k/apology/donation) after 38 minutes or after 2.5 months (give or take)?