On 9/4/15 2:26 AM, Califbill wrote:
Califbill billnews wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 9/3/15 4:22 PM, Califbill wrote:
Boating All Out wrote:
In article je8huad6ujkabq00svu1apklcu1p6mi8ju@
4ax.com, says...

On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 13:19:28 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


The federal judge just found Davis in contempt of court and ordered her
to jail.

I am not sure if Rand Paul is right.

He's a ****ing eye doctor.

According to Harry, he is OK. He has a Doctorate.


Can you go *one day* without posting something here that is not
extraordinarily ignorant and stupid?

What is ignorant about the statement? You dried anyone without degrees or
advanced degrees!

Frisk' spell corrector. Deride


No, I don't. If you are having "spell corrector" problems, just shut off
the "spell correcter," Mr. "Frisk'"

On 9/3/2015 6:41 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 7:21:24 AM UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 06:32:41 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/3/15 1:39 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:22:01 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

I wonder how many of those supporting Kentucky clerk Kim Davis's refusal
to issue a marriage license to a gay couple based upon her religious
objection to same-sex couples marrying would support her if she were
empowered to issue gun permits but refused to do so based upon a
religious commitment to pacifism?

It should be noted that she is not issuing ANY marriage licenses.



Willful nonfeasance by a public official. I hope the federal judge
throws the book at her. These efforts of bat**** crazy "religious" folks
to turn this country into an ayatollahville need to be stopped.

Yet you give Hillary, whose 'malfeasance' was much more severe, a pass.

What a f'ing hypocrite.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Email-gate keeps rolling along. Now a Clinton staffer that helped to setup the server says he's going to "take the 5th". Heh. I think the Clinton teflon is wearing thin, and this guy doesn't want to have an "accident".



He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:
On 9/3/2015 6:41 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 7:21:24 AM UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 06:32:41 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/3/15 1:39 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:22:01 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

I wonder how many of those supporting Kentucky clerk Kim Davis's
refusal
to issue a marriage license to a gay couple based upon her religious
objection to same-sex couples marrying would support her if she were
empowered to issue gun permits but refused to do so based upon a
religious commitment to pacifism?

It should be noted that she is not issuing ANY marriage licenses.



Willful nonfeasance by a public official. I hope the federal judge
throws the book at her. These efforts of bat**** crazy "religious"
folks
to turn this country into an ayatollahville need to be stopped.

Yet you give Hillary, whose 'malfeasance' was much more severe, a pass.

What a f'ing hypocrite.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Email-gate keeps rolling along. Now a Clinton staffer that helped to
setup the server says he's going to "take the 5th". Heh. I think the
Clinton teflon is wearing thin, and this guy doesn't want to have an
"accident".



He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 6:43:56 PM UTC-5, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:
On 9/3/2015 6:41 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 7:21:24 AM UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015 06:32:41 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/3/15 1:39 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:22:01 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

I wonder how many of those supporting Kentucky clerk Kim Davis's
refusal
to issue a marriage license to a gay couple based upon her religious
objection to same-sex couples marrying would support her if she were
empowered to issue gun permits but refused to do so based upon a
religious commitment to pacifism?

It should be noted that she is not issuing ANY marriage licenses.



Willful nonfeasance by a public official. I hope the federal judge
throws the book at her. These efforts of bat**** crazy "religious"
folks
to turn this country into an ayatollahville need to be stopped.

Yet you give Hillary, whose 'malfeasance' was much more severe, a pass.

What a f'ing hypocrite.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Email-gate keeps rolling along. Now a Clinton staffer that helped to
setup the server says he's going to "take the 5th". Heh. I think the
Clinton teflon is wearing thin, and this guy doesn't want to have an
"accident".



He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

Throughout your coulourful life I'm sure you have "taken the fifth" on several occasions, thus making you an expert on the said matter.

On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 19:43:54 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:

He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

The way prosecutors get around the 5th amendment is to grant immunity.
Then there is no incrimination and failure to testify is contempt of
court.

On 9/6/15 1:34 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 19:43:54 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:

He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

The way prosecutors get around the 5th amendment is to grant immunity.
Then there is no incrimination and failure to testify is contempt of
court.


Gosh, really?

On 9/6/2015 1:34 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 19:43:54 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:

He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

The way prosecutors get around the 5th amendment is to grant immunity.
Then there is no incrimination and failure to testify is contempt of
court.

Kind of like confessing your sins to be forgiven by the gods in black robes.

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 08:39:08 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/6/15 1:34 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 19:43:54 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:

He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

The way prosecutors get around the 5th amendment is to grant immunity.
Then there is no incrimination and failure to testify is contempt of
court.


Gosh, really?

I am curious what Hillary's in house geek has to hide.

On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 11:40:34 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 08:39:08 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/6/15 1:34 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 19:43:54 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:

He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

The way prosecutors get around the 5th amendment is to grant immunity.
Then there is no incrimination and failure to testify is contempt of
court.


Gosh, really?

I am curious what Hillary's in house geek has to hide.

===

If they can catch him in some kind of technical law violation, that
can be used as a bargaining chip to turn him against Hillary. They
will play hard ball with him if they can find an opening.

On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 13:31:35 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Sep 2015 11:40:34 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 6 Sep 2015 08:39:08 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/6/15 1:34 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 Sep 2015 19:43:54 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 9/5/15 7:31 PM, amdx wrote:

He's all set to get probation if he testifies truthfully.

Mikek

D'oh. Do you even know what "taking the Fifth" means? Probably not.

The way prosecutors get around the 5th amendment is to grant immunity.
Then there is no incrimination and failure to testify is contempt of
court.


Gosh, really?

I am curious what Hillary's in house geek has to hide.

===

If they can catch him in some kind of technical law violation, that
can be used as a bargaining chip to turn him against Hillary. They
will play hard ball with him if they can find an opening.

That is always the game of chicken they play with immunity. If he has
immunity and then says it was all his doing, nobody else knew what he
was doing, everyone walks.
It is always better if they know what they are immunizing him from
before they move.
Like the old adage says, never ask a question you don't already know
the answer to.
That is really best when it is a perjury trap.