Skjalfeirdotter said: »
Hurricane Katrina was "handled badly" because it was "the government" that made Hurricane Katrina [what it was].
Are you implying Hurricane Katrina wasn't a thing?
Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential Thread
Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential Thread
Are you implying Hurricane Katrina wasn't a thing?
no, Skjialf is implying it was made by "the government", a secret organization of shadowy figures that control the real government, who do everything in their power to hide the real truth from the ignorant mass of sheeple.
Caitsith.Shiroi said: »
Um no I didn't say that, re-read what I said ... let me help you, his presence in person is irrelevant but his duty toward them isn't.
Just by being there shows that the person actually cares enough to take time out of their day to be there, and for families suffering through losing everything, that means a lot to them.
Obama is expected to get FEMA involved. Trump is not expected to be there, but he did anyway.
Clinton will more than likely not show up, but that's her choice. She doesn't give a ***about the American people, and that just proves it.
Candlejack said: »
I wonder if LG realizes that yes, you can try to indict her, but if it ends in an acquittal then that particular AG's/ prosecutor's career in the field of law will be pretty much over? I mean, heck, why do you think James Comey said it? "No self-respecting prosecutor will touch this case"? It's because they know if they *** up, and it ends in an acquittal, good bye gravy train.
fonewear said: »
Hillary is too busy deleting e-mails to go visit Louisiana.
Expect her e-mails probably contained something more important than "hot Asians next door" Actually they probably did contain a lot of porn spam. I don't think Hillary understands how e-mail works...
Except *
Anna Ruthven said: »
Candlejack said: »
I wonder if LG realizes that yes, you can try to indict her, but if it ends in an acquittal then that particular AG's/ prosecutor's career in the field of law will be pretty much over? I mean, heck, why do you think James Comey said it? "No self-respecting prosecutor will touch this case"? It's because they know if they *** up, and it ends in an acquittal, good bye gravy train.
Only murder cases have no statute of limitations. Non-fraud cases have up to 3 years, fraud cases have 7 years.
[+]
I get like, shadey dong enlargement spam. My favorite title so far is "you'll never fit in her back door again!"
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
Hurricane Katrina was "handled badly" because it was "the government" that made Hurricane Katrina [what it was].
JET FUEL CAN'T MELT STEEL LEVEES.
Maybe not, but nano-thermite can cut through steel girders and Tesla Tech Array can pulverize concrete and steel to 80 microns through molecular disassociation... but I digress, don't vote for Hillary for the Presidency, vote Hillary for Prison instead. :3
[+]
Candlejack said: »
why do you think James Comey said it? "No self-respecting prosecutor will touch this case"?
Probably because they value their lives.
[+]
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
nano-thermite
...wait, this is military grade ***here. Are you saying that the military is involved? I thought this was a government conspiracy (with shadow players and all that jazz).
If the military is involved, what hope do we, have against them?
/kneels down in a fetal position hoping that the next solder doesn't come in to rape me.
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
Hurricane Katrina was "handled badly" because it was "the government" that made Hurricane Katrina [what it was].
JET FUEL CAN'T MELT STEEL LEVEES.
Maybe not, but nano-thermite can cut through steel girders and Tesla Tech Array can pulverize concrete and steel to 80 microns through molecular disassociation... but I digress, don't vote for Hillary for the Presidency, vote Hillary for Prison instead. :3
Anna Ruthven said: »
Candlejack said: »
I wonder if LG realizes that yes, you can try to indict her, but if it ends in an acquittal then that particular AG's/ prosecutor's career in the field of law will be pretty much over? I mean, heck, why do you think James Comey said it? "No self-respecting prosecutor will touch this case"? It's because they know if they *** up, and it ends in an acquittal, good bye gravy train.
I'm no lawyer, but I don't think this is a situation where double jeopardy comes into play. She was not tried and acquitted of wrongdoing by a judge or jury. She actually wasn't acquitted at all. They simply declined to prosecute based on what they currently have.
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Anna Ruthven said: »
Candlejack said: »
I wonder if LG realizes that yes, you can try to indict her, but if it ends in an acquittal then that particular AG's/ prosecutor's career in the field of law will be pretty much over? I mean, heck, why do you think James Comey said it? "No self-respecting prosecutor will touch this case"? It's because they know if they *** up, and it ends in an acquittal, good bye gravy train.
I'm no lawyer, but I don't think this is a situation where double jeopardy comes into play. She was not tried and acquitted of wrongdoing by a judge or jury. She actually wasn't acquitted at all. They simply declined to prosecute based on what they currently have.
But no politics is being played here.....
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
nano-thermite
...wait, this is military grade ***here. Are you saying that the military is involved? I thought this was a government conspiracy (with shadow players and all that jazz).
If the military is involved, what hope do we, have against them?
/kneels down in a fetal position hoping that the next solder doesn't come in to rape me.
Both, among others.
Yes, elements within the "military" are complaisant
There is always hope
Truth will set you free.
[+]
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
Truth will set you free.
Not if it gets me emotionally bound to some psychopath on YouTube.
[+]
Candlejack said: »
Anna Ruthven said: »
Candlejack said: »
I wonder if LG realizes that yes, you can try to indict her, but if it ends in an acquittal then that particular AG's/ prosecutor's career in the field of law will be pretty much over? I mean, heck, why do you think James Comey said it? "No self-respecting prosecutor will touch this case"? It's because they know if they *** up, and it ends in an acquittal, good bye gravy train.
So, it's try her now and risk getting her acquitted, and she gets off scott free while the prosecutor's reputation is destroyed and career ends in shambles, or they can bide their time, be patient, and hope she does something that will have a one hundred percent chance of nailing her on a conviction.
Regardless of any of that, 15000 more emails were handed over to the FBI and I believe she claimed to have turned them all over under oath. Even a Jr. prosecutor could get her in jail for perjury.
[+]
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Skjalfeirdotter said: »
nano-thermite
...wait, this is military grade ***here. Are you saying that the military is involved? I thought this was a government conspiracy (with shadow players and all that jazz).
If the military is involved, what hope do we, have against them?
/kneels down in a fetal position hoping that the next solder doesn't come in to rape me.
Both, among others.
Yes, elements within the "military" are complaisant
There is always hope
Truth will set you free.
It's a good book. You should read it.
[+]
Poor CJ.
Another victim of the block feature. I already answered "statute of limitations" but he continues to profess legal knowledge without knowing anything about law.
Another victim of the block feature. I already answered "statute of limitations" but he continues to profess legal knowledge without knowing anything about law.
This "obviously has broken several laws" talk becomes much, much different when the jury goes into the deliberation room. Trust me on that one.
Was on jury duty once, assault charge for a guy who turns out was already in for life. We all knew without a shadow of a doubt he did it, we all vocally agreed on this. But we didn't have absolute, undeniable proof he did it because the camera on the bus where he assaulted the other inmate malfunctioned so all we saw was them get on the bus and for the rest of the ride, nothing.
It doesn't matter what a jury thinks or believes. It's what they take from the proof given. If you go in with sketchy evidence and no absolute proof, it will end badly for you.
Was on jury duty once, assault charge for a guy who turns out was already in for life. We all knew without a shadow of a doubt he did it, we all vocally agreed on this. But we didn't have absolute, undeniable proof he did it because the camera on the bus where he assaulted the other inmate malfunctioned so all we saw was them get on the bus and for the rest of the ride, nothing.
It doesn't matter what a jury thinks or believes. It's what they take from the proof given. If you go in with sketchy evidence and no absolute proof, it will end badly for you.
Unless the Jury is biased, crooked, or being paid off...all I got was my gas money back. :(
Anna Ruthven said: »
Unless the Jury is biased, crooked, or being paid off...all I got was my gas money back. :(
Jury duty is stupid because of this. They don't even cover for your hours lost at work.
Anna Ruthven said: »
This "obviously has broken several laws" talk becomes much, much different when the jury goes into the deliberation room. Trust me on that one.
Was on jury duty once, assault charge for a guy who turns out was already in for life. We all knew without a shadow of a doubt he did it, we all vocally agreed on this. But we didn't have absolute, undeniable proof he did it because the camera on the bus where he assaulted the other inmate malfunctioned so all we saw was them get on the bus and for the rest of the ride, nothing.
It doesn't matter what a jury thinks or believes. It's what they take from the proof given. If you go in with sketchy evidence and no absolute proof, it will end badly for you.
Was on jury duty once, assault charge for a guy who turns out was already in for life. We all knew without a shadow of a doubt he did it, we all vocally agreed on this. But we didn't have absolute, undeniable proof he did it because the camera on the bus where he assaulted the other inmate malfunctioned so all we saw was them get on the bus and for the rest of the ride, nothing.
It doesn't matter what a jury thinks or believes. It's what they take from the proof given. If you go in with sketchy evidence and no absolute proof, it will end badly for you.
Lack of intent does not expunge you from breaking the law.
[+]
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.