Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SECURE AMERICA

Then they say it is defamation, The judge says no name calling or I would be in contempt.


48 posted on 05/23/2012 9:41:34 PM PDT by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: dila813

There are probably polite phraseologies to get around most of this B.S. Like “believe that XXX is carrying on in an YYY manner.” Or generalities like “ZZZ is wrong.” Usually it makes sense to try to be polite before little Napoleons; they might be appeased. But pure legal B.S. needs to get challenged. If you could not argue that the officer purposedly engaged in untruth if you had reason to support that, then this ought to be matter for an appellate court and surely there ought to be citizens organizations for this purpose if there is any sense of honor left in the land.


50 posted on 05/23/2012 9:48:35 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Let me ABOs run loose Lou, let me ABOs run loose! They are of much use Lou, so let me ABOs run loose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: dila813
"Your honor, the gentleman, knowing the trught, has spoken otherwise. He has said the thing which is not (HT: Jonathan Swift)."
93 posted on 05/23/2012 11:41:25 PM PDT by ExGeeEye (Romney sucks. Mutiny now, or something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: dila813
trught

Ack!

"truth".

95 posted on 05/23/2012 11:42:28 PM PDT by ExGeeEye (Romney sucks. Mutiny now, or something.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson