What are we going to talk about now?

[billvon 2,991]

6 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

you're just being an ass now

So you don't have a single example of something you said was clear and obvious, that I was "far off the mark" about.  But you have plenty of  angry insults.

Very good.  Carry on!

[normiss 800]

57 minutes ago, billvon said:

So you don't have a single example of something you said was clear and obvious, that I was "far off the mark" about.  But you have plenty of  angry insults.

Very good.  Carry on!

First time I've seen a greenie PA response of carry on.

Typical response is a vacation.

This is what happens when our country ignores the rules of law.

 

[Coreece 190]

47 minutes ago, normiss said:

First time I've seen a greenie PA response of carry on.

Typical response is a vacation.

This is what happens when our country ignores the rules of law.

I know you're joking around, but again, as in the other thread awhile back wrt law enforcement, I think you're ignoring the idea of having discretion. (or perhaps even grace) 

Also, you don't know if he used the new system and gave him a warning shot.  In any event, Bill has seemed to be consistently more lenient when dealing with attacks against himself as apposed to attacks against other posters, which IMO is rather admirable.

[brenthutch 444]

57 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I know you're joking around, but again, as in the other thread awhile back wrt law enforcement, I think you're ignoring the idea of having discretion. (or perhaps even grace) 

Also, you don't know if he used the new system and gave him a warning shot.  In any event, Bill has seemed to be consistently more lenient when dealing with attacks against himself as apposed to attacks against other posters, which IMO is rather admirable.

I will second that 

[airdvr 210]

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

I know you're joking around, but again, as in the other thread awhile back wrt law enforcement, I think you're ignoring the idea of having discretion. (or perhaps even grace) 

Also, you don't know if he used the new system and gave him a warning shot.  In any event, Bill has seemed to be consistently more lenient when dealing with attacks against himself as apposed to attacks against other posters, which IMO is rather admirable.

Shoulda' been a cop 

[sfzombie13 324]

3 hours ago, billvon said:

So you don't have a single example of something you said was clear and obvious, that I was "far off the mark" about.  But you have plenty of  angry insults.

Very good.  Carry on!

if that is what you consider an angry insult, you should stay off the internet.  some have even said it was a personal attack.  i read a lot.  i don't bookmark every interesting article, but i do remember the content.  this is what i was presenting to you, strictly for your enlightenment.  i don't care if you go look it up or not, that would be your decision.  i am not trying to convince anyone of anything or i would have cited it.  one thing to remember:  it's ok to be wrong.  think i'll just go over there for a bit and let this one go. 

[kallend 2,027]

• WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Thursday sharply criticized Attorney General William P. Barr’s handling of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, saying that Mr. Barr put forward a “distorted” and “misleading” account of its findings and lacked credibility on the topic.

  Mr. Barr could not be trusted, Judge Reggie B. Walton said, citing “inconsistencies” between the attorney general’s statements about the report when it was secret and its actual contents that turned out to be more damaging to President Trump. Mr. Barr’s “lack of candor” called into question his “credibility and, in turn, the department’s” assurances to the court, Judge Walton said.

  The judge ordered the Justice Department to privately show him the portions of the report that were censored in the publicly released version so he could independently verify the justifications for those redactions. The ruling came in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking a full-text version of the report.

   Barb McQuade: University of Michigan law professor: “The revelation that Barr was misleading in his public representations about the Mueller Report is nothing new, but quite remarkable to see a federal judge write it in a legal decision.”
• Josh Gerstein, Politico: “Walton’s claim that Barr displayed a ‘lack of candor’ is likely to reverberate loudly within the Justice Department. That phrase has unusual weight in federal law enforcement, where such an accusation can and does result in dismissal. ‘Lack of candor’ is specifically what former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was accused of before being fired by Barr’s predecessor, Jeff Sessions, in 2018.”

[Phil1111 1,149]

apparatchik-an official in a large political organization- for the Republican party the Attorney General- They advise and represent their legislature and state agencies and act as the “People’s Lawyer” for the citizens. Most are elected, though a few are appointed by the governor