Posted on 08/12/2020 9:53:48 AM PDT by ransomnote
From a song a friend and I wrote years ago:
You’ve been born in a third world country
Born bind, crippled or diseased
Growing up on the desert sands
and digging food from garbage cans
There’s not enough food so you kill each other
Or beg food from Sally Struthers
A viral infection makes you go insane
Normal people don’t eat monkey brains
-SB
So the corrupt escape because there is reasonable doubt? Who is the corrupt in that scenario, the accused or the prosecutor?
hmm, interesting. ok will have to do without. not going to sign up for Variety. Thanks for follow up.
Ahh, mucho better. Thanks LJ.
I don’t remember who posted this last night, but it seemed worth to me to post in the forum -
Very good video harking back to a speech from 1960 (who IS that guy?) interspersed with images from today’s RATS trying to turn us into a socialist/commie state.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3874347/posts?page=1
THE ONE VIDEO ANTIFA, BLM, FACEBOOK, & YOUTUBE DON’T WANT YOU TO SEE BECAUSE IT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING
bitchute ^ | 8/13/2020 | The Common Sense Conservative
You may want to refresh your memory on the concept of “rule of law”.
“The cornerstone to American Criminal Jurisprudence is that the accused is presumed innocent until guilt is proved beyond a reasonable doubt”
So yes, that is how it is supposed to work. Equally enforced and fairly adjudicated.
They're crying in their shandy (Shandy is beer mixed with a lemon or a lemon-lime flavored beverage)
So the corrupt escape because there is reasonable doubt? Who is the corrupt in that scenario, the accused or the prosecutor?
***********************
Corrupt escape if they’re not indicted/charged.
Stealing this and posting on twitter.
“Here’s the federal law Clinesmith violated.
As you can see, Clinesmith was looking at five years in prison.
If he ends up with just a few months, he must have given Durham some real cooperation. “
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001
18 U.S. Code §1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to—
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
Ha ha, thanks! So he had the opportunity to denounce or disavow Q and didn’t. Hee hee
Exactly. When I get occasional bouts of dis-spiritedness I go away and claw myself back together before appearing in public.
::Who leaked to Zeldin?::
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don’t think it could be considered a leak since Barr said as much on TV.
Breaking: Appeals court rules Hillary Clinton does not have to testify on emails and Benghazi attack records. @JudicialWatch is disappointed by the decision and considering its options.. https://t.co/ZAFkgPHFOo— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) August 14, 2020
One today! Just the tip of the iceberg, the beginning, the teaser, etc.
And you might refresh yourself re: what I wrote.
***************************************************************
Ok bagster, let me tell you what your mistake was ..... you called upon Human Resources instead of your Q-Union Rep.
If there isn't evidence to convict them, why have you judged them corrupt? If the prosecution can't bring a case and win based on the evidence, they have no case. Who says they won't be charged? Or do you know more than the prosecutors, and FEEL they should move faster? Then get OYA and get that job, there are plenty of corrupt fish in the sea or leave it to the pros.
Was Robert Trump’s condition mentioned?
Clinesmith has been under the microscope for two years, during which Durham has been exploiting everything Clinesmith shared. It's going to be glorious!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.