02-03-2008, 10:35 PM | #21 | |
Glides a lot, talks more...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Pelham, NH, USA.
Posts: 10,356
|
Quote:
The real truth is you will never really know the truth. Most everyone who reports the facts are either lying or are reporting what they honestly believe is the truth, but has already been manipulated... And the point is moot. If George Bush were to have been found out after the fact that there was some irregularity, like maybe, a local democratic county government that designed a butterfly ballot, then later claimed foul, while forgetting to tell everyone that the whole thing was originally a Democratic party situation... ANyway, if an irregularity gets claimed, so what? If the facts lean toward Jeremy, or toward where he wants it to have been, what then? Will they forget whoever is president and make Al Gore president? Or maybe John Kerry? NO. History will march on, with maybe a footnote, maybe not... There are still people who do not think we landed on the Moon. There are people that think professional wrestling is on the level. The world is full of all types of people who believe and disbeleive all types of facts... Believeing a fact or not believing it, does not change it's status as a fact.
__________________
Karl Ian Sagal To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "Well done is better than well said." (Ben Franklin) Bene factum melior bene dictum Proud past President of SEG America and member of the First Premier Segway Enthusiasts Group and subsequent ones as well. |
|
02-03-2008, 10:45 PM | #22 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Where Boris runs free and so do !!!
Posts: 782
|
Quote:
He will still be regarded as President, that is true, but if the facts lean towards my opinion he will be regarded as a criminal and a disgrace to society! The allegations go beyond just an irregularity! The allegations include alleged evidence that Bush faked the election and knew it! They also show ballots being destroyed, dead people voting for Bush, etc. None of these allegations have been proven true or false so I will just leave them as allegations. If they are proven true then that is how he will be viewed. There is a chance he will be viewed that way regardless of what happens with the election! I was just saying this. What five flags called a fact "that he was elected by american laws" is not fact! That is an opinion. One cannot verify one way or another whether cheating was involved therefore cannot verify whether the election was concluded under American laws. That being said it is possible that it never will be proven one way or another. In that instance opinions will always be opinions and nothing will ever change! I tend to think though that things will be investigated and will come out one way or another in the future! It may not happen! That is all I was saying! Jeremy Ryan |
|
02-03-2008, 11:00 PM | #23 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: TAMPA, FLORIDA
Posts: 120
|
Break A Leg
All of that below having been said, do I qualify for the "Guiness Book of Records" or not? So far, no information has been forthcoming stating otherwise. Should I apply for recognition at the Guiness web site? RAY-NER
__________________
KEEP ON TRUCKIN' |
02-03-2008, 11:06 PM | #24 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Where Boris runs free and so do !!!
Posts: 782
|
Quote:
Jeremy Ryan |
|
02-03-2008, 11:54 PM | #25 |
Glides a lot, talks more...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Pelham, NH, USA.
Posts: 10,356
|
When a judge says that something complies with law, that is a pretty good indication that it complies.
I believe there are other judges you can appeal to, but once you get to the Supreme Court of the United States, I do not know of any further place to go, within the law. So, I believe it is decided locally, appealed locally, regionally, then federally to the Supreme Court, and once they confirm it complies with the laws of the land, the only thing left to do according to the constitution, is to call Jeremy, and see if he approves... We do not have to concur with their decisions, but constitutionally, we are not asked, as individuals.
__________________
Karl Ian Sagal To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. "Well done is better than well said." (Ben Franklin) Bene factum melior bene dictum Proud past President of SEG America and member of the First Premier Segway Enthusiasts Group and subsequent ones as well. |
02-04-2008, 12:03 AM | #26 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Where Boris runs free and so do !!!
Posts: 782
|
Quote:
See Karl I believe we will not agree on this! Just because a judge says something complies with laws, to me, does not make it so! The supreme court will always be partisan! This is the way it is! The Supreme court was acting as all judges would and giving the benefit of the doubt to the plantiff! This is common in cases where there is no concrete evidence pointing one way or the other! You may call me if you wish though and it was a good gesture Karl. My number, once again, is 608-469-8232! As far as after that goes I respect your opinion but, in this matter disagree! Thank you though! Jeremy Ryan |
|
02-04-2008, 01:21 AM | #27 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Silentville
Posts: 1,122
|
In this thread: How to get a thread locked.
|
02-04-2008, 02:47 AM | #28 |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Posts: 2,533
|
Jeremy, Jeremy, Jeremy (said while shaking my head side to side),
Courts, when there is no evidence, throw out cases, not "lean" towards the plaintiff as you imply. Furthermore, the Supreme Court is NOT partisan. While they might have their own personal convictions, they can not, and do not, state which person / party they wish to see elected. In the case of Bush v. Gore, the SC determined by a vote of 7-2 that the method of recount was unconstitutional. Note that vote majority...SEVEN to TWO. There is no partisanship there, it is readings of law that established this majority opinion. In the second part of the case, the SC determined by a vote of 5-4 that there was not ample time to conduct a proper (equitable) recount in the alloted time. Before you jump on the dissenting votes, please note that 2 were appointed by Democrats and 2 by Republican. Again, no partisanship here. So, President Bush did not steal the election, he won it based on the laws currently on the books. You may not like the results, or you may think you don't like them based on what people have told you, but the reality is that the election occurred as the laws of the country (and in this case the state) directed. I, again, encourage you to do some research rather than listening to the "sea stories" (that one is for Five Flags!) that many like to repeat. Finally, just so you understand the law a little better, a plaintiff must prove their case beyond a shadow of a doubt while a defendant just has to place doubt. This is why defendants (so called only in criminal cases) go free when there seems to be a preponderance of evidence against them (OJ Simpson is one many folks like to point at). So, your statement re the plaintiff always getting the "break" (my words) is wrong...that goes to the defendant. If you need / want some references IOT do research, drop me a line. Steven |
02-04-2008, 02:48 AM | #29 | |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Posts: 2,533
|
Quote:
Sorry for hijacking the thread (or assisting in same). Sorry about your leg. Sorry about the Guiness Book of Records...I just don't think this is a category but if you get in let me know, I broke my toe flying off a Segway! Steven |
|
02-04-2008, 03:14 AM | #30 | |
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Posts: 2,533
|
Quote:
SAGAL v RYAN - For the real, unbiased truth...at least from their perspective You could do it while gliding, each in your own home, using VOIP headsets, making it an eco-friend political slugfest. Steven |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|