Yes, on a technicality. no "standing". No one has

Posted By: ever said the suits had no merit to them.nm on 2008-11-29
In Reply to: They ARE dying. They're losing every one of them. - get it?

nm

Complete Discussion Below:

marks the location of current message within thread

so sick of reading this crap - shelly
- I am curious to know how many of this people who...sm - oldtimer
  - Good point - ExMQMT
- I don't tihnk a BC proof of citizenship is stupid. - Backwards typist
  - " I will embrace the O as a president until he screws up" sm - oldtimer
    - No, i abolustely belive he will screw up - Backwards typist
      - No he is not perfection, no human is. In the current...sm - oldtimer
      - I believe you are absolutely right.....sm - m
        Curious, did you vote for John McCain because you thought he was perfect? sm - oldtimer
      - Opps-absolutely (spelling error(nm) - Backwards typist
- He is so squeaky clean, hence the fictional garbage. nm - oldtimer
  - Hardly "squeaky clean".........sm - m
    - No smoke, no fire, only mirrors. LOL! - oldtimer
- I do care, BUT.. - GhostMom
  - Funny you should say this - Just me
- I care. If he gets away with it, then let's just have - president of Iran or other Prince Charles, or
  - LOL - I agree with you totally but this did give me a chuckle - Just me
- "who cares"? If he is lying/fraud, I care. - We all should. nm
- You and me both. - Marmann
- are you kidding??? - dnh
- Hello, stranger........... sm - m
  - It has been cleared up. - nm
    - Has the SC met and I missed it? sm - m
      - See article inside - very interesting - hmmm
        Man! I spent only a half hour looking at that site! - Backwards typist
        I was thinking the same thing.....sm - m
        Very NOT interesting, same old tired stuff. n/m - gourdpainter
        I doubt you even read it...........sm - m
        Actually new stuff, you just don't like to see it. n/m - just me
        Nothing new that I saw, - gourdpainter
      - Right, Obama himself could have cleared this up. - He has not as of yet.nm
        You are right on - that's all we ask for. If he would have provided it - This would not be an issue
        Yes, he has. Where've you been? - sm
        NO he has not! If he had cleared it up, these - lawsuits would die -only getting worse.nm
        They ARE dying. They're losing every one of them. - get it?
        nothing has been lost until the SC decides - dnh
        anti-obama question - honestly asking
        My guess is that they don't like him because he is ... - Barry Watts
        Don't get that started here......... sm - m
        My reasons for not standing behind Obama.......... sm - m
        Thanks, really - honestly asking
        My reason for speaking against the election....... sm - m
        BC issue already verified - honestly
        Wrong again - no message - Just me
        Wrong.... SC has not covened on this. sm - m
        Insanity is performing the same action repeatedly - sm
        Hence, and then we have your post - Just me
        Yes, on a technicality. no "standing". No one has - ever said the suits had no merit to them.nm
        If Berg were able to successfully argue on the so-called - merits of the case....sm
        Why wont Obama just show his long-form - vault copy and clear it up, huh? creepy.nm
        He has but the loons cannot accept the - finality of this reality.
      - "Obamatrons"? How old are you? - That's so immature.

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Other related messages found in our database

Technicality s/m
It may be a "loan" but it's still a bail-out. I think they'll end up filing bankruptcy anyhow unless the economy turns around and fast. Otherwise who's going to be buying new cars, especially if they can't get loans?

Why.....it's just a perjury technicality..that's all, LMBO!

It was okay to *get* Clinton on a ******perjury technicality***** but we should not prejudge the republicans..ha, yeah, right..oh please..

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson: What Crime?

The new GOP talking point to defend anyone indicted by Patrick Fitzgerald will be the perjury technicality. Apparently the criminalization of politics theme wasn't picked up by the GOP.

Video -WMP Bittorrent-WMP QT later

As Think Progress notes: Perjury is just a little technicality punishable by up to five years in prison

To Tim's credit, he did bring up the case made by republicans against Clinton.