Winners only.

[djdilliodon!]

She's not that attractive (in my book), but a I bet a broad this crazy is nuts in the sack.

Twitter Users Fact-check Marjorie Taylor Greene, Remind Her Who Was President In 2020 - BuzzLoving.com

Georgia's representative attacked the president, but this time she did not talk about "the Biden family crimes." She blamed POTUS for Covid-19 restrictions

buzzloving.com

I’d hit it

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Incorrect, as usual. I accept the jury’s decision because our court system is set up to have a jury as a proxy for all citizens. A jury gets picked by the prosecution and the defense, and is tasked with making the decision in the case. We as a country except trial by jury as a way to handle cases like this, and many others.

Is this new information to you? I think many of the basics we are talking about were taught in grade school social studies.

No, you accept it because it is the outcome you wanted as a Trump hater.

Not going with my gut at all. I fully believe that a trial happened, and that the jury reached a verdict. I think if that were not true, Trump would be shouting from the rooftops.
I also believe verdicts are reached in thousands of cases per year, and that the juries did the job they were selected to do in those cases too.
Do you think all jury decisions are incorrect, or just this one because it was not in Trump’s favor?

I think you accept this verdict based on your feelings. You can lie about it all you want.

Try reading my words next time. I GET TO CHOOSE WHETHER I AM GOING TO BELIEVE SOMETHING OR NOT, AND I GET TO CHOOSE WHETHER I BELIEVE TESTIMONY (such as your testimony that there are no nerves in bones) OR WHETHER I WANT HARD EVIDENCE TO BACK UP THE TESTIMONY.

LOL whatever man. I am fully convinced that you are making decisions based on your hatred for Trump. "I accept his guilt because I don't like him" That's you Rob.

“Move on already”. Does that mean you as Thunderdome overlord have decided for all members here that the Trump conversation is over, or will you allow others to speak their mind if they so wish?

You're a funny guy.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

She's not that attractive (in my book), but a I bet a broad this crazy is nuts in the sack.

Twitter Users Fact-check Marjorie Taylor Greene, Remind Her Who Was President In 2020 - BuzzLoving.com

Georgia's representative attacked the president, but this time she did not talk about "the Biden family crimes." She blamed POTUS for Covid-19 restrictions

buzzloving.com

People will listen to and believe this nutjob, while simultaneously claiming the stats of the economy have been faked for 70 years.

Stupidity knows no bounds.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

So, what alternative do you propose?

I don't think he's proposing an alternative; (I think) he's saying the verdict doesn't mean Trump actually committed the ****** assault.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Good for Penny. Not saying that Jordan Neely deserved to die. However, if some guy was going nuts ranting and raving "I don't care if I go to prison, I don't care if I die," and my wife and kids were on that subway, I would want somebody to step and do something.

Online fund raises nearly $2 million for Daniel Penny’s legal defense in subway case

An online crowdfunding page has raised nearly $2 million for the legal defense of Daniel Penny, the former Marine charged last week with second-degree manslaughter in the chokehold death of Jordan …

thehill.com

 

[Eggs 5,000+ posts]

FAKE NEWS!!! Trump said there is no global warming.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/04/10/sea-level-rise-southern-us/

Looks like king tide.

What is a King Tide?

A King Tide is a popular, non-scientific term people often use to describe exceptionally high tides that occur during a new or full moon.

oceanservice.noaa.gov

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Looks like king tide.

What is a King Tide?

A King Tide is a popular, non-scientific term people often use to describe exceptionally high tides that occur during a new or full moon.

oceanservice.noaa.gov

Exactly, FAKE NEWS - the ocean levels aren't rising.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

At least somebody is doing something about mass shootings in school. You're still screwed in the case of a headshot or if the shooter gets a frontal shot on you. I guess you could just always just go with a vest. It's pretty easy to bleed out from a leg shot too. The other problem is even with armor, the round may still knock you down, crack ribs, etc and leave you a sitting duck for a kill shot. Nevertheless, it's better than nothing.

This 16-year-old student invented a bulletproof backpack and is now a finalist at the world's largest high school science fair

"I can't vote, but I can engineer," said Ava Cotroneo, a finalist at the Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair being held in Texas.

finance.yahoo.com

Bulletproof backpacks wouldn’t have saved anyone in recent shootings

Almost 40 percent of adults say they’re “very concerned” about a school shooting, and almost half of adults say they would buy a bulletproof backpack for their child.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

I don't think he's proposing an alternative; (I think) he's saying the verdict doesn't mean Trump actually committed the ****** assault.

I don't know if I could've voted anyone guilty in a case like that...frankly I'm OK with admitting I just don't know rather than blindly follow a verdict in a case fundamentally lacking evidence or even hard details...

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

I don't know if I could've voted anyone guilty in a case like that...frankly I'm OK with admitting I just don't know rather than blindly follow a verdict in a case fundamentally lacking evidence or even hard details...

Keep in mind the qualification to vote guilty in the case was "preponderance of evidence;" ie was EJC's case more believable than Trump's? Given the lies Trump was already caught in regarding the case and the fact that he no showed, it's easy to see why he lost.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Keep in mind the qualification to vote guilty in the case was "preponderance of evidence;" ie was EJC's case more believable than Trump's? Given the lies Trump was already caught in regarding the case and the fact that he no showed, it's easy to see why he lost.

Just because one person lies doesn't mean the other is truthful...I know the bar is lower in civil cases...I just don't think either side met that bar tbh

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Just because one person lies doesn't mean the other is truthful...I know the bar is lower in civil cases...I just don't think either side met that bar tbh

You are saying this knowing nothing more about the case or the hearing than what was reported.
The jury had FAR more information to work with when reaching their decision.

So without having any evidence and with very limited information about the case yourself, you know the jury reached the wrong decision and you know what your decision would have been.
Thing about the logic of that for a long moment.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

No, you accept it because it is the outcome you wanted as a Trump hater.

Hmmm, sounds like you are deciding what my thoughts are.
As happens so very often, you are wrong.

I think you accept this verdict based on your feelings. You can lie about it all you want.

I accept them because they are the law. I don't drive 90 because it's the law, not because I FEEL like it. I don't go into a courthouse with my sidearm because it's the law, not because I don't FEEL like it.
The jury did the job of a jury.
Do you think they did the job wrong?
If so, WHY?

LOL whatever man. I am fully convinced that you are making decisions based on your hatred for Trump. "I accept his guilt because I don't like him" That's you Rob.

I'll ask again: Do you think the jury got it wrong?
If so, WHY?

You're a funny guy.

I try.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ation-early-childhood-************-FOURS.html

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

You are saying this knowing nothing more about the case or the hearing than what was reported.
The jury had FAR more information to work with when reaching their decision.

So without having any evidence and with very limited information about the case yourself, you know the jury reached the wrong decision and you know what your decision would have been.
Thing about the logic of that for a long moment.

At least I don't take anything that makes me feel all cuddly inside as absolute truth...do you know 100% the jury was right? Of course you do...you stated so once already...