dim-retard Congress woman cheated on her female-threesome staffer with her male staffer

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

That is not garment


garment

[ˈɡärmənt]



NOUN

garments (plural noun)
an item of clothing.
"a windproof outer garment" · [more]
"fashion garments"

synonyms:
item of clothing · article of clothing · item of dress

and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia.No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc

Nothing was exposed. Everything of concern to ECCIE was indeed censored/masked so that it could pass muster in a public newspaper. Your asinine argument to the contrary is bullshit.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Nothing was exposed. Everything of concern to ECCIE was indeed censored/masked so that it could pass muster in a public newspaper. Your asinine argument to the contrary is bullshit.

+1

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

as usual you are wrong. the image comes straight from the article and was already edited for publication.

did you not even click on the link? the photo is from the Daily Beast. they "sanitized" it for publication. as for the device .. that's just you making a snit over nothing.

and it's a moot point now because she's going to resign.


Rep. Katie Hill to resign amid allegations of inappropriate relationships with staffers

https://www.yahoo.com/news/rep-katie...223747505.html

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Nothing was exposed. Everything of concern to ECCIE was indeed censored/masked so that it could pass muster in a public newspaper. Your asinine argument to the contrary is bullshit.

And yet he posts what certainly appears to be pictures of children, which is also against ECCIE rules.

https://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p...6&postcount=11

[WTF]

Originally Posted by eccielover

And yet he posts what certainly appears to be pictures of children, which is also against ECCIE rules.

https://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p...6&postcount=11

That in fact was a mistake...I thought I had posted a picture of a Blind man. Not sure how that happened. My apologies.

See how easy it is to admit a mistake?

I saw that after time had expired.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

+1

+1 does not = eccie rules....



and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia.No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

+1 does not = eccie rules....

and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia.No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc

There is, in fact, no "below the waist nudity". It's been censored out.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

There is, in fact, no "below the waist nudity". It's been censored out.

That is a not what eccie's rules require. They require a garment to be worn. So you are trying to distort eccie rules with your continued nonsense.


and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia.No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

That is a not what eccie's rules require. They require a garment to be worn. So you are trying to distort eccie rules with your continued nonsense.


and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia.No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc

Nothing was exposed. Everything of concern to ECCIE was indeed censored/masked so that it could pass muster in a public newspaper. Your asinine argument to the contrary is bullshit.

[timmystool]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

an no TITs

but she swallows amd fks like Forrest's mom

[dilbert firestorm]

looks like congress woman Hill resigned.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Nothing was exposed. Everything of concern to ECCIE was indeed censored/masked so that it could pass muster in a public newspaper. Your asinine argument to the contrary is bullshit.

Your distortion about a newspaper is just that, a distortion.

The new eccie rules do not allow posting nude bottomless pictures...no exceptions.

and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia.No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by WTF

What part of the blackened highlighted rule do you not understand?

Topless images, including nipples, and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia. No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc.). Butt cheeks are welcome. Additionally, images where the subject is wearing something below the waist, but still leave genitalia, the anus, or pubic hair partially exposed are not allowed. Clothing that clings to the genital region or clothing that is somewhat transparent is permitted. Common examples of what is not acceptable are nude shower photos where the lady is covered in bubbles or nude pictures of the lady kneeling even where the genital region is concealed, a garment must be worn and visible.




Gorilla nuts...or were they?

The classic frustrated DPST response to valid criticism of a ridiculous point of view/opinion - Pull a gun and threaten violence.

Smooth move - Troll
Respect is earned - not given - and I care not for any from your ilk.

No - WTF will never be a Mod - its' life ambition thwarted.

LOL
RTM away!!

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by oeb11

.
WTF will never be a Mod - its' life ambition thwarted.

to quote robert browning

a man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?

and its not so sad wtf doesn't realize his limitations, its his inability to tell the truth

[oeb11]

NGIT - well quoted!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

Your distortion about a newspaper is just that, a distortion.

The new eccie rules do not allow posting nude bottomless pictures...no exceptions.

and below the waist nudity is not allowed. Thongs, bikini bottoms, etc. are required. No exposed anus or exposed genitalia.No exceptions, even if nothing is exposed, there needs to be some sort of garment worn (e.g., underwear, bikini, thong, etc

You can't see beneath the black-out ink to claim there isn't a pastie. You're celebrating your ignorance.