He don't know us verwy well, do he?
Hey, Nifong: you're a lying scumbag.
And I'm in a county next to you.
Come and get me, copper!
How could he go after them?
Slander? He's a public figure. Pretty much fair game, unless the writer KNOWS what he or she is writing is false.
What's this all about? Is there some connection to the provably-false rape charges against the Duke University lacrosse team?
LOL! He must have read the posts about his Assistant DA, C. Destine Couch, or all that incriminating evidence we have drudged up (pun intended).
A few of us got this url on a certificate check pop-up about an hour ago while freeping:
https://www.hseep.dhs.gov/
Well, we can all see that Monks gave this election to Liefong. Cheek would have won by a thousand votes if those hadn't gone to Monks.
I would like to pummel his face until he bleeds from his ears.
Effing bastard!
Meanwhile the LaCross players families have engaged some of the best legal defence teams and private investigators available.
When the trial happens or should I say, IF it happens, Nifong will get his A$$ handed to him.
The whole Duke fiasco may have been a ploy so Nifong would get elected in a constituency that has large numbers of decent Black folk who have been taken advantage of yet again.
Since Nifong has a god complex, I wouldn't be surprised if this rumor is true. If he feels he needs more trouble, all I can say is, "Come get some!"
Maybe Nifong should go up against Fox News and Greta Van Susteren. They don't think much of his case, either.
6 to 5 and pick 'em.
If he's coming for me COME GET ME YOU $H!T!!!!
(sorry but after last night I'm pretty angry....)
Maybe he'll use the rape-shield laws to go after bloggers who revealed "VICTIM X's (Crystal's) real name. Sounds like something Nifong would do.
On that subject I fully expect a law suit will be filed against FR by some newspaper.
Further, I believe there will be a new tactic in that war, Libel, or is it Slander when speaking of Blogs/Bulletin Boards?
BTW Since the polls closed last night I am 100% so far on my predictions.
I called Rummy right
I called the President's new tone with the Democrats right
I called the online polls right (About how soon should the soldiers come home
and I got the first Salvo of questions and stories right concerning the MSM going straight to how soon will we pull out of Iraq and claiming that this was a referendum on the war in Iraq.
And it makes me all very sad.
He don't know us verwy well, do he?
Oh, I tell you baby this increases my paranoia
Yeah, like looking in my mirror and seeing a police car
Well, well, I'm not, I'm not giving in an inch to fear
Well, you know I've promised myself this year
Well, I feel oh, like I owe it, I owe, I owe it to someone
Oh ... like I owe it to someone
1) The rumor's true and Nifong thinks he has the power to assault the 1st amendment in this fashion. He's a loon and he loses.
2) It's partly true, in that he wants the rumors out there to have a chilling effect but doesn't really have a way to enforce it.
3)It's partly false: He leaks the rumor knowing he's got squat but just to bait someone from making a statement that could be considered a violent or death threat. He goes after that (or the site that hosted it) either really or just for the press.
4)It's totally false: Not even this arrogant jerk would consider assailing the 1st amendment.
Bring it on @$$hole! LOL! Not directed at you Condor.
Time to speak up, with all deliberate speed
Kristin Butler - Posted: 11/10/06
Like hundreds of you, I cast my first ballot as a resident of Durham this Tuesday. And like nearly all of you, I was shocked and dismayed by the outcome of that election. It's hard to imagine what-if anything-49 percent of Durham residents were thinking when they voted for District Attorney Mike Nifong, who has disgraced this community before a national audience.
But even as we acknowledge Nifong's electoral victory, Duke students should continue to reject the ignorant, counterfactual and deeply offensive logic embraced by many of his proponents.
To see what I mean, consider this statement from Harris Johnson, a Nifong supporter and longtime Durham resident: "[Nifong's victory] just goes to show that justice can't be bought by a bunch of rich white boys from New York… no matter how much money you have, Durham is owned by its citizens."
Surprisingly, Duke's own Associate Professor of Literature Grant Farred advanced a similar argument in his Oct. 27 letter to the Herald-Sun. Citing many students' decision to register to vote locally this fall, Farred wrote:
"Duke students are notorious in their disconnect from the 'black' city of Durham". The plan here is not to act in Durham or for the general good of Durham, but to act against the non-Duke Durham community." Farred concludes that "the goal of these new, expedient and transient members of Durham's political community is to repair the damage done to historic white male privilege by voting against" Mike Nifong.
Both of these arguments boil down to the same insinuation: that Duke students aren't "real" Durham residents, and we have no place in this town's political determinations. Well, Professor Farred and Mr. Johnson, I have news for you: We are very much citizens of this community, and one electoral defeat will not keep us from continuing to demand our rights as such.
Let's face the facts. We spend at least 70 percent of each of our four college years in Durham, and during that time we're subject to the same local laws, taxes and responsibilities as everyone else.
What's more, fully 15 percent of undergraduates and the vast majority of graduate and professional students actually live in Durham neighborhoods, paying rent to Durham landlords and living alongside long-term residents.
A boon to the local economy, all 12,085 Duke students spent approximately $92.5 million here during the 2005-2006 school year-and that's a conservative estimate. It's not even possible to calculate the number of community service hours Duke students devote to Durham each year; suffice it to say that the number is safely in the tens of thousands.
Still, we do know that Duke students, while studying at a university the tuition and fees of which nearly exceed Durham's average yearly income, nonetheless managed to donate 80,000 of their own dollars to this community in 2005. So let's not avoid the important question any longer: Are these not the "badges and incidents" of citizenship?
How much longer will Durham residents continue to disregard our participation in the residential, economic and civic activities of this community, all of which predated our recent claim to political enfranchisement?
And most important of all, will fellow Durham residents ever stop treating us like second-class citizens in a community that we-along with generations of alumni, faculty and staff before us-helped build?
Unfortunately, 49 percent of Durham voters answered "no" on Tuesday, leaving us with some very serious problems for the next four years. Chief among them is a district attorney who thinks it's acceptable to target Duke students because our "rich daddies" can buy us "expensive lawyers."
Note also that Nifong is joined by a police force whose officers-prominent among them Sgt. Mark Gottlieb, a lead investigator in the lacrosse case-exhibit what attorney Bill Thomas called "a real pattern of arresting Duke students on less serious charges while not arresting non-Duke students on much more serious charges."
Most frightening of all, three of our classmates will face a politically motivated prosecution this spring despite overwhelming evidence suggesting their innocence. Never forget: Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and Dave Evans could spend decades of their lives in prison if convicted of first degree forcible rape, first degree sexual offense and first degree kidnapping.
And given that 49 percent of voters supported Nifong's deeply troubled candidacy this week, our classmates' chances of getting a fair trial before a Durham-based "jury of their peers" have never looked so bleak. That's why I hope we students will set aside our post-election blues and continue to assert-in as bold and visible a way as possible-our full, unqualified status as Durham citizens.
Let's come out and say it: We are owed some basic fairness under the law. Our attempts to defend the rights we are afforded are not assertions of "historical white male privilege," but rather, of our identity as contributing, concerned members of this community.
And as victims of Durham's "political process," we are more than justified in our attempts to influence it through whatever legal means are available.
If that reclamation threatens people like Harris Johnson and Grant Farred, then so be it. But as Nifong himself said, the lacrosse case "remains a Durham problem, and it demands a Durham solution."
It's time to say that we're from Durham, too, and we fully intend to participate in that "solution."
Kristin Butler is a Trinity junior. Her column runs every Friday.