Guess you missed the part where it said SNAP is not involved in any of the cases, you blowhard cultist.JoltinJoe wrote:No, they didn't. The would need to investigate the personal finances of SNAP's leaders, as well as the finances of SNAP itself, which they plainly didn't do.Cap'n Cat wrote:
Well, I'm going to guess that the NYT reporters did a lot more research than you assume, Joe. Maybe they didn't graduate from Fordham, but they are professionals, nonetheless. Again, what they're doing is simply a check band balance against the tendency for massive org's like the RCC to get away with murder if left unmolested.
The reason the attorneys in these cases are demanding SNAP's records is because its involvement in litigation is obvious and apparent, and the inference is that its leaders are not doing this for free.
Going to William Donohue for quotes is an evident give-away of the Times' motivations. He is a loose cannon and likely to say something inflammatory or insipid.
Your priests rape kids. Period.
And for fucks like you to demand that others' provide documents is a fucking joke. You've been hiding and shredding for decades, and your non cooperation has contributed to the misery of thousands of rape victims that could have been avoided.
Shame on you, POS.














