grinreaper

In his defense I'm pretty sure he knows all about the colon.

If gator posts something that has no glaring grammatical mistakes or is properly put together, you can be fairly sure that it is someone else's work.

Who are you leaving out?

Catfish are bottom feeders.

Except that's not a legal argument.

Oh wow, this comes close to you not knowing how many weeks are in a month. You should sue your mother. All evidence proves that you must have been dropped on your head as a child. From very high up.

Hey, how many different subjects are you going to get involved with? One would think there's no room for any more egg on your face. From post# 418 of this thread: Tiberius, on 17 May 2017 - 11:53 AM, said: Try this on for size, you dumbass. Have you ever thought that maybe you should check things out before opening your mouth. You know, there is a world outside of Huffington Post. http://ijr.com/opini...t-course-trump/ This is, essentially, what ACLU attorney Omar Jadwat admitted yesterday during an en banc hearing on the travel ban in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, during an exchange with Judge Paul Niemeyer (video above thanks to NTK network): JUDGE NIEMEYER: We have a candidate who won the presidency, some candidate other than President Trump, won the presidency, and then chose to issue this particular order...Do I understand that just in that circumstance the executive order should be honored? OMAR JADWAT: Yes your honor, I think in that case it could be constitutional. This was a huge - and potentially costly - admission by Jadwat. It effectively conceded that the executive order is, in fact, facially constitutional; that is, he agreed that nothing about the text of the order is illegal (so much for the passionate arguments about statutory violations or due process rights!)

Is this as thigh slapping funny as the Benghazi deaths?

Comey was in some way either complicit in spreading false rumors regarding Trump or criminally liable for not reporting Trump's attempts to obstruct the investigation.

https://www.wnypapers.com/news/article/featured/2017/04/29/128353/ijc-responds-to-lake-ontario-flooding As of Tuesday, the lake was 19 inches above normal and the lake is expected to crest in mid-May by an additional 11 to 14 inches or more. The lake stands at 21 inches above its long-term April averages and, since December 2016, has risen 39 inches, according to data from the MLive.com Media group, based in Michigan. But, despite forecasts of worsening conditions in coming weeks, the International Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Board remains optimistic in its long-term estimations. "Flows from the Ottawa River have peaked and are now expected to decline, and flooding in the Montreal area is subsiding, allowing (for) higher outflows from Lake Ontario," the board reported. "Nonetheless, inflows from local streams and Lake Erie remain high, and Lake Ontario levels are expected to continue rising in May, and possibly into June if the wet weather persists. "As water levels on Lake Ontario rise, its outflows will increase and high levels downstream at Lake St. Louis will continue. Coastal jurisdictions should prepare for the possibility of major coastal flooding as storms frequently occur at this time of year. Though it has been nearly 20 years since water levels have been this high (since 1998), higher levels on Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River have occurred several times in the past and will occur again in the

Are you saying that they can't regulate the outflow to either raise or lower the lake level?

Gotta hand it to you. Ever since lyrbob left we've been lacking his special brand of ignorance coupled with pre pubescent snark. You make a very adequate replacement.

So his private memorandum content gets leaked and virtually the entire media, the left and some on the right are running with the story that Trump committed obstruction of justice and you fall back on this schit?

Looks like Comey is !@#$ed or really !@#$ed: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/gregg-jarrett-comeys-revenge-is-a-gun-without-powder/ar-BBBdLbm?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=HPCOMMDHP15 Here is what we do know. Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the President of the United States. Failure to do so would result in criminal charges against Comey. (18 USC 4 and 28 USC 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law. So, if Comey believed Trump attempted to obstruct justice, did he comply with the law by reporting it to the DOJ? If not, it calls into question whether the events occurred as the Times reported it. Obstruction requires what’s called “specific intent” to interfere with a criminal case. If Comey concluded, however, that Trump’s language was vague, ambiguous or elliptical, then he has no duty under the law to report it because it does not rise to the level of specific intent. Thus, no crime. There is no evidence Comey ever alerted officials at the Justice Department, as he is duty-bound to do. Surely if he had, that incriminating information would have made its way to the public either by an indictment or, more likely, an investigation that could hardly be kept confidential in the intervening months. Comey’s memo is being treated as a “smoking gun” only because the media and Democrats, likely prompted by Comey himself, are now peddling it that way. Comey will soon testify before Congress about this and other matters. His memo will likely be produced pursuant to a subpoena. The words and the context will matter. But by writing a memo, Comey has put himself in a box. If he now accuses the President of obstruction, he places himself in legal jeopardy for failing to promptly and properly report it. If he says it was merely an uncomfortable conversation, he clears the president of wrongdoing and sullies his own image as a guy who attempted to smear the man who fired him. Either way, James Comey comes out a loser. No matter. The media will hail him a hero. After all, he gave them a good story that was better than the truth.

Try this on for size, you dumbass. Have you ever thought that maybe you should check things out before opening your mouth. You know, there is a world outside of Huffington Post. http://ijr.com/opinion/2017/05/265638-aclu-lawyer-makes-bizarre-admission-travel-ban-court-course-trump/ This is, essentially, what ACLU attorney Omar Jadwat admitted yesterday during an en banc hearing on the travel ban in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, during an exchange with Judge Paul Niemeyer (video above thanks to NTK network): JUDGE NIEMEYER: We have a candidate who won the presidency, some candidate other than President Trump, won the presidency, and then chose to issue this particular order...Do I understand that just in that circumstance the executive order should be honored? OMAR JADWAT: Yes your honor, I think in that case it could be constitutional. This was a huge - and potentially costly - admission by Jadwat. It effectively conceded that the executive order is, in fact, facially constitutional; that is, he agreed that nothing about the text of the order is illegal (so much for the passionate arguments about statutory violations or due process rights!)

The first was withdrawn and replaced with one very similar but one that should have satisfied the court's objections to the first EO. The court found a way to strike that down too. It doesn't matter though. This isn't about the law anymore, it's all about Trump. Just ask the ACLU attorney who said he'd have no objections to the EO if Hillary had made it.

You should take your partisan glasses off. It couldn't get past the 9th Circuit, a court so liberal it makes Maxine Waters seem like a Goldwater Girl. I think the Supreme Court will look at it a tad differently.

This is the kind of thing that gator does. You posted a serious allegation, got pressed on it and then instead of backing it up, you tried to laugh it off. Own your schit and please don't be another gator.

OK, let me make it simple for you. What makes you believe that those memos and emails exist? How do you know for sure?

So, it was the media that lost the election for your girl? For some reason you are totally blind when it comes to her. Have you been like, you know, pleasuring yourself while looking at her picture or something?

Do you have a copy of the memos and email that he circulated within the FBI?

I didn't ask you. I want gator to answer and specifically state all of the aides or subordinates that had direct contact with Putin.

What aides had direct connections to Putin? Please name them or stop this ridiculous assertion.

I asked Tiberius this question and I'll ask you too. How many people should be on this independent council?

If he ran you over with a car schitforbrains, then who would be turd breath then? Can you imagine the threat to the environment coming out of your mouth?