View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993 Posts: 10588
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can definitely understand what you're saying. The idea of this perpetual tennis match can be trying. Nevertheless, you have to realize that isobars depends on you, because he elects to see you and respond to you here. As a result, you carry a deeper responsibility. That means he can taunt you anytime you elect to contribute here. In a sense, those of us that have been "PLONKED" are far less burdened.
Do you think that if no one ever responded to him, that he would simply go away? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mogunn
Joined: 03 Apr 2006 Posts: 1307 Location: SF Bay
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
coboardhead wrote: | I appear to be the one feeding this troll right now...I believe I will take a break. Got a couple weeks on the water coming up anyway...later. | Good winds to you CB! I think I'll take my leave too. I'm tired of the continual assaults against women waged by iso and his cronies on this forum. _________________ mo |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17748 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I repeat. There is much more wrong with Mikey than narcissism. He reminds me of a member of the American Nazi party I knew at a blue collar job in the early 1970's. Very sick. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 Posts: 2643
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well said Mac. I didn't feel it my place to say so, but, precisely what I was thinking.
He's turned his twisted rage on C.B. at present after his initial overtures were ignored, but as Chandler, Mo, and others say, he's an embarrassment to many of the people on this forum. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanWeiss
Joined: 24 Jun 2008 Posts: 2296 Location: Connecticut, USA
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
isobars wrote: | coboardhead wrote: | Ummm...I didn't write that. Now, Don Q is tilting at me for Feuser's comments. Again I am complimented. |
You're right. Because you refuse to use the bulletin board's normal QUOTE button but instead cut and paste stuff, the resulting format is confusing. I had to Google the accusation to find its real source ... to whom my post still applies.
Interestingly, in that Google process I saw that DanWeiss wrote: | isobars wrote: | I wonder how well the liberal media covered the fact that Clinton was impeached for perjury -- for undermining the very foundation of our entire legal system by lying under oath -- rather than for defiling OUR White House. |
Another incitement (not incisive) from Mr. Ficktion. I realize you were in the admitted infancy of your political awareness at that time, but even you should know the difference between a charge and a conviction. The Senate acquitted President Clinton based on what everyone knows was a highly politicized investigation |
Apparently Dan, a lawyer, does not even understand that impeachment does not imply conviction; the charge itself constitutes impeachment even if the charge is dismissed. I wonder if he knows that the same goes for a military court martial. But what I REALLY wonder is whether he, whose career is our adversarial jurisprudence system, understands that it is based on the presumption that sworn testimony is true unless explicitly disproved, and that president and lawyer Bill Clinton’s perjury -- lying under oath --before a grand jury undermines that system. Thus while politics may have helped initiate his impeachment, his own party, if it had a conscience, shouldn’t have needed the GOP to push the issue. |
Wrong. Mike, why don't you go to law school before pontificating on the rules of evidence and trial practice? Oral testimony is presumed to be neither true nor false. The trier of fact (judge or jury) is expressly charged with the obligation to weigh the credibility of the witness who utters factual claims. The trier of fact is free to believe the witness or not.
Holy cow, Mike, you bootstrap your arguments. Clinton was acquitted of perjury, yet you make the case that he perjured himself and it was his perjury that undermined the office. Remember, he was tried on two counts, perjury and obstruction of justice, and acquitted on both. _________________ Support Your Sport. Join US Windsurfing!
www.USWindsurfing.org |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 Posts: 5180
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Impeachment is the process, not the outcome. Bill Clinton was impeached. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9120 Location: at a computer
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for news flash Mr. Gybe, did you hear that Mexico devalued the peso? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20935
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DanWeiss wrote: | Clinton was tried. |
Thus you admit by definition that he was impeached, while loudly denying and obfuscating that fact with diversions. Good lawyer!
I've not been to law school, but my sources included Hanse and Black and I know that impeachment refers to charges and processes, not verdicts. Do you have ANY idea how many times I've defeated single lawyers and even whole teams of lawyers in decisions involving thousands to hundreds of millions of dollars, including blue chip corporation lawyers, a government procurement agency, local ambulance chasers, and federal court? They all put their pants on the same way I do: jump into the air and come down into my wingtips.
The difference so far is that mine were already laced and ready for the fight. I don't enter frays that important as unarmed as Verrilli was in the Supreme Court this week. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001 Posts: 4161
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Holy frijoles boggsman. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002 Posts: 9120 Location: at a computer
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Knew somebody would enjoy that one, which actually took place in 1994. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|