RETARDED SHIT TALKING MOAR
ahahahaha.
It's your job to read messages before you respond. The fact that you didn't recognize my source even though you quoted it shows you failed at doing your job.
Topic: Explosive devices sent to Bill/Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, George Soros, CNN (Read 7305 times)
November 14, 2018, 05:58:40 PM
ahahahaha.
August 07, 2019, 01:12:51 PM
This is a coverup. The explosive devices were sent for them to use against their enemies. And it is working. People think, "Poor Hill and Billary." And the pair become more popular.
August 05, 2019, 04:46:31 PM
Dude got 20 years in prison. nice.
December 25, 2018, 03:06:02 PM
....
Mnuchin ....
Hard to trust or be allied with anyone named MunchkinMnuchin ....
(or close enough to it for gov work....)
December 25, 2018, 10:40:53 AM
This intellectual mongoloid show's how naive people can be and how easy it is to mis direct a stupid person's anger.
I wonder if sayoc knows that the current secretary of the treasury was the man who ran the company who "roboclosed" on his house and obviously a big part of the reason for him living in his Trump truck! It wasn't the DEMS, gays, jews, soros, hilary, obama, it in fact was a Trump ball cupper, a big part of the fucking swamp that was supposed to get drained...
Mnuchin helped run the biggest robosigning company of the 08' banking scam and walked away with 10's (100's?) of millions of dollars personally while avoiding any criminal liability, no wonder Trump loves him!
But hey Trump says fake news, build the wall, drain the swamp what ever gets the mouth breathers frothing!
I wonder if sayoc knows that the current secretary of the treasury was the man who ran the company who "roboclosed" on his house and obviously a big part of the reason for him living in his Trump truck! It wasn't the DEMS, gays, jews, soros, hilary, obama, it in fact was a Trump ball cupper, a big part of the fucking swamp that was supposed to get drained...
Mnuchin helped run the biggest robosigning company of the 08' banking scam and walked away with 10's (100's?) of millions of dollars personally while avoiding any criminal liability, no wonder Trump loves him!
But hey Trump says fake news, build the wall, drain the swamp what ever gets the mouth breathers frothing!
November 16, 2018, 11:53:23 AM
6. In the questioning period, the questioner may ask any fair, clear question that has a direct bearing on the debate.
Ahaha, and that's why you've lost
Ahaha, and that's why you've lost
November 16, 2018, 11:23:05 AM
Congrats on learning to source and do your own research. Really, I am actually impressed. Regardless this is 100% designed to distract from the total failure that was the Kavanaugh investigation, real or not.
So, a crazy right wing bomber was a distraction from a political nomination? Alright. I don't know what tin foil you wear, but it must be some high quality stuff
I say it was to distract from the backfiring of the slandering of Kavanugh perpetrated by the dems, and then you just write something I didn't say, pretend I said it, then argue that. I bet you got all the gold stars in debate class......
You are joking, right? The tactics used by blue would be disqualifying in debate. As an example...
http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/debate1.htm
1. There are two teams, each consisting of two or three speakers.
2. Each team has two or three constructive speeches, and two to three rebuttal speeches. The affirmative gives the first constructive speech, and the rebuttals alternate: negative, affirmative, negative, affirmative. The affirmative has both the first and last speeches of the debate.
3. When worded as a proposition of policy, the topic requires the affirmative to support some specified action by some particular individual or group. The affirmative has the right to make any reasonable definition of each of the terms of the proposition. If the negative challenges the reasonableness of a definition by the affirmative, the judge must accept the definition of the team that shows better grounds for its interpretation of the term.
4. The affirmative must advocate everything required by the topic itself. No revision of position of a team is permitted during the debate.
5. He who asserts must prove. In order to establish an assertion, the team must support it with enough evidence and logic to convince an intelligent but previously uninformed person that it is more reasonable to believe the assertion than to disbelieve it. Facts must be accurate. Visual materials are permissible, and once introduced, they become available for the opponents' use if desired.
6. In the questioning period, the questioner may ask any fair, clear question that has a direct bearing on the debate. The questioner may use the period to build up any part of his own case, to tear down any part of his opposition's case, or to ascertain facts, such as the opposition's position on a certain issue, that can be used later in the debate. The questioner must confine himself to questions and not make statements, comments, or ask rhetorical questions.
7. Each speaker is questioned as soon as he concludes his constructive speech. The witness must answer the questions without consulting his colleagues.
8. No new constructive arguments may be introduced in the rebuttal period. The affirmative must, if possible, reply to the major negative arguments before the last rebuttal.
9. The judge must base his decision entirely on the material presented, without regard for other material which he may happen to possess.
10. Any gains made outside of the established procedure are disallowed.
November 15, 2018, 10:03:53 PM
Congrats on learning to source and do your own research. Really, I am actually impressed. Regardless this is 100% designed to distract from the total failure that was the Kavanaugh investigation, real or not.
So, a crazy right wing bomber was a distraction from a political nomination? Alright. I don't know what tin foil you wear, but it must be some high quality stuff
I say it was to distract from the backfiring of the slandering of Kavanugh perpetrated by the dems, and then you just write something I didn't say, pretend I said it, then argue that. I bet you got all the gold stars in debate class. Maybe if you leave me some more butt hurt negative trust ratings it will change my mind
November 15, 2018, 09:00:20 PM
Fake news. Here are the ACTUAL CHARGES: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5022036/Charges-against-Cesar-Sayoc.pdf
You will notice weapons of mass destruction is not included.
You will notice weapons of mass destruction is not included.
Actually real news.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/cesar-altieri-sayoc-charged-30-count-indictment-mailing-improvised-explosive-devices
No idea where you pulled up that paperwork. Here are the REAL charges;
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1110121/download
Congrats on learning to source and do your own research. Really, I am actually impressed. Regardless this is 100% designed to distract from the total failure that was the Kavanaugh investigation, real or not.
So, a crazy right wing bomber was a distraction from a political nomination? Alright. I don't know what tin foil you wear, but it must be some high quality stuff
November 13, 2018, 05:41:05 PM
Fake news. Here are the ACTUAL CHARGES: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5022036/Charges-against-Cesar-Sayoc.pdf
You will notice weapons of mass destruction is not included.
You will notice weapons of mass destruction is not included.
Actually real news.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/cesar-altieri-sayoc-charged-30-count-indictment-mailing-improvised-explosive-devices
No idea where you pulled up that paperwork. Here are the REAL charges;
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1110121/download
Congrats on learning to source and do your own research. Really, I am actually impressed. Regardless this is 100% designed to distract from the total failure that was the Kavanaugh investigation, real or not.
November 13, 2018, 03:32:04 PM
Fake news. Here are the ACTUAL CHARGES: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5022036/Charges-against-Cesar-Sayoc.pdf
You will notice weapons of mass destruction is not included.
You will notice weapons of mass destruction is not included.
Actually real news.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/cesar-altieri-sayoc-charged-30-count-indictment-mailing-improvised-explosive-devices
No idea where you pulled up that paperwork. Here are the REAL charges;
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1110121/download
November 13, 2018, 09:48:22 AM
None of this proves anything about my point anyway that Sayoc was not charged with "weapons of mass destruction" the standard charge for anyone in possession of a functional explosive device.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/mail-bombing-suspect-cesar-sayoc-indicted-30-counts/story?id=59088285
Quote
The charges include the use of a weapon of mass destruction, interstate transportation of explosives, illegal mailing of explosives and threatening interstate communications.
Fake news. Here are the ACTUAL CHARGES: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5022036/Charges-against-Cesar-Sayoc.pdf
You will notice weapons of mass destruction is not included.
Good job for staying on topic for a change though! Although I suspect you only did it because you thought you were right, but it is progress anyway.
November 13, 2018, 01:28:49 AM
None of this proves anything about my point anyway that Sayoc was not charged with "weapons of mass destruction" the standard charge for anyone in possession of a functional explosive device.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/mail-bombing-suspect-cesar-sayoc-indicted-30-counts/story?id=59088285
Quote
The charges include the use of a weapon of mass destruction, interstate transportation of explosives, illegal mailing of explosives and threatening interstate communications.
November 13, 2018, 01:01:25 AM
So, the GOP hate rhetoric...
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
AAAAnd thank you for your version of admitting you were wrong
Just gave up arguing. It's not worth arguing legal battles with a non-lawyer. It's just bird shit thrown around without any precedence. The shit you say, if you asked /r/asklegal would get you pretty much banned.
But I'd like to actually point out Cesar Sayoc was taken in by alt-right and right wing hate narratives. It seems that he also pushed a narrative. He went to attack and lash out.
Scott Leader and Steve Leader
Curtis Allen, Gavin Wright, and Patrick Eugene Stein
Alexandre Bissonnette
Michael Hari, Michael McWhorter, and Joe Morris
James Alex Fields Jr.
Brandon Griesemer
Nikolas Cruz
(https://theintercept.com/2018/10/27/here-is-a-list-of-far-right-attackers-trump-inspired-cesar-sayoc-wasnt-the-first-and-wont-be-the-last/ source for the names)
That's a lot of people radicalized by the same hate driven narrative. Literally to the extent to harm others.
So, the GOP hate rhetoric...
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
AAAAnd thank you for your version of admitting you were wrong (changing the subject). Anyone with a functional explosive device will be charged under "weapons of mass destruction" which Cesar Sayok was not. This demonstrates the media was purposely misrepresenting this situation to create maximum fear as well as distract from the horrible failure that was the Kavanaugh witch hunt that blew up in the Democrats faces.
Don't edit my quotes to make yourself look better and try to distract from the subject of discussion to yet another topic.
So you are a lawyer now? Your appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. Of course you don't want to discuss it. Why would you want to admit you were wrong, ever?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law
November 13, 2018, 12:41:18 AM
So, the GOP hate rhetoric...
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
AAAAnd thank you for your version of admitting you were wrong
Just gave up arguing. It's not worth arguing legal battles with a non-lawyer. It's just bird shit thrown around without any precedence. The shit you say, if you asked /r/asklegal would get you pretty much banned.
But I'd like to actually point out Cesar Sayoc was taken in by alt-right and right wing hate narratives. It seems that he also pushed a narrative. He went to attack and lash out.
Scott Leader and Steve Leader
Curtis Allen, Gavin Wright, and Patrick Eugene Stein
Alexandre Bissonnette
Michael Hari, Michael McWhorter, and Joe Morris
James Alex Fields Jr.
Brandon Griesemer
Nikolas Cruz
(https://theintercept.com/2018/10/27/here-is-a-list-of-far-right-attackers-trump-inspired-cesar-sayoc-wasnt-the-first-and-wont-be-the-last/ source for the names)
That's a lot of people radicalized by the same hate driven narrative. Literally to the extent to harm others.
November 13, 2018, 12:36:57 AM
So, the GOP hate rhetoric...
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
AAAAnd thank you for your version of admitting you were wrong (changing the subject). Anyone with a functional explosive device will be charged under "weapons of mass destruction" which Cesar Sayok was not. This demonstrates the media was purposely misrepresenting this situation to create maximum fear as well as distract from the horrible failure that was the Kavanaugh witch hunt that blew up in the Democrats faces.
I thought it was totally obvious the "bombs" were a total joke, but I guess some of the propaganda that I don't pay attention to was being taken seriously by some people.
For what it's worth if someone's batshit crazy, it doesn't really make sense to try to impute a political affiliation and/or a political motive to their actions.
November 13, 2018, 12:12:53 AM
So, the GOP hate rhetoric...
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
AAAAnd thank you for your version of admitting you were wrong (changing the subject). Anyone with a functional explosive device will be charged under "weapons of mass destruction" which Cesar Sayok was not. This demonstrates the media was purposely misrepresenting this situation to create maximum fear as well as distract from the horrible failure that was the Kavanaugh witch hunt that blew up in the Democrats faces.
November 12, 2018, 11:57:09 PM
So, the GOP hate rhetoric...
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
Is that the reason this crazy guy chose his targets?
November 12, 2018, 11:49:07 PM
I never said anything about redefining anything, you did. So is your argument that the law was passed after Kazinski committed his acts? That argument sounds familiar. The crimes he committed as far as I have seen are committed BEFORE the "weapons of mass destruction" legislation was passed. Therefore he would not legally be able to be charged under this statute. None of this proves anything about my point anyway that Sayoc was not charged with "weapons of mass destruction" the standard charge for anyone in possession of a functional explosive device.
1994 - https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/3355
1996 arrest, 1998 plea deal - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski
Quote
After his arrest in 1996, Kaczynski tried unsuccessfully to dismiss his court-appointed lawyers because they wanted him to plead insanity in order to avoid the death penalty, and he did not believe he was insane. In 1998 a plea bargain was reached, under which he pleaded guilty to all charges and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
He was arrested after the law passed. Cause time works that way... Did ya know 1996 occurs after 1994?
I'm pretty sure you're just purposely misconstruing arguments, and because you've been proven wrong time and time again about this issue (and pretty much every single issue you troll on); you're just digging yourself a deeper hole.
But we're pretty off-topic, pretty sure this topic was about a radical dis-attached individual attacking leftist... crazy dude be crazy. It does make me wonder if GOP's hate rhetoric is much different than that same hate rhetoric from ISIS.
That's not how the law works. You can't be charged with laws that were passed AFTER the act was committed. The date of his arrest is irrelevant. I am on topic. The premise is the fact that Cesar Sayok was not charged with a "weapons of mass destruction" charge demonstrates the devices were not functional and there is some thing else going on here. You are off topic with this unibomber bullshit, and you are wrong about that anyway.
November 12, 2018, 11:39:12 PM
I never said anything about redefining anything, you did. So is your argument that the law was passed after Kazinski committed his acts? That argument sounds familiar. The crimes he committed as far as I have seen are committed BEFORE the "weapons of mass destruction" legislation was passed. Therefore he would not legally be able to be charged under this statute. None of this proves anything about my point anyway that Sayoc was not charged with "weapons of mass destruction" the standard charge for anyone in possession of a functional explosive device.
1994 - https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/3355
1996 arrest, 1998 plea deal - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski
Quote
After his arrest in 1996, Kaczynski tried unsuccessfully to dismiss his court-appointed lawyers because they wanted him to plead insanity in order to avoid the death penalty, and he did not believe he was insane. In 1998 a plea bargain was reached, under which he pleaded guilty to all charges and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
He was arrested after the law passed. Cause time works that way... Did ya know 1996 occurs after 1994?
I'm pretty sure you're just purposely misconstruing arguments, and because you've been proven wrong time and time again about this issue (and pretty much every single issue you troll on); you're just digging yourself a deeper hole.
But we're pretty off-topic, pretty sure this topic was about a radical dis-attached individual attacking leftist... crazy dude be crazy. It does make me wonder if GOP's hate rhetoric is much different than that same hate rhetoric from ISIS.
Jump to: