 | |
{OT} - Pardon for Libby - vote.com query
Toyota Discussions related to Toyota cars and trucks (alt.autos.toyota)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#31
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: {OT} - Pardon for Libby - vote.com query -
03-09-2007
, 03:56 PM
|
Describe a situation in which a grand jury would get involved in sexual matters between two people in an office, ASSUMING that neither person complained about the sexual liason? ROFLAMO I see I've nailed you again. I'll play for a bit... Director one is before the grand jury because there is an investigation of a corporation involving insider trading. Director one is asked if he has had sex with an intern. Director one says no. Further investigation shows he is lying. Scott in Florida 1/2 second after the director was asked about sex, his lawyer would be out of his chair crying foul, and we would be correct because sex has nothing to do with insider trading. It would be obvious (to anyone but an idiot) that the prosecutor was simply trying to color the jury's opinion of the director. It would certainly work on you, if you were on the jury. PSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSST Joe..... You DON'T have a lawyer with ya in grand jury. |
OK. YOu got me, diaper boy. My question remains: In the scenario YOU
suggested, which YOU said involved insider trading, why would ANYONE ask a
corporate director about sex?
I need an example so you can get me again.
#32
| |||
| |||
|
|
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:OvjIh.4589$ya1.1621 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny... "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-9A9E45.14270609032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... No. Waiting for Scott to explain how the courts would get involved with a situation where someone in an office accidentally unplugged the water cooler. He can't. I thought it was about sex in the office. Same thing, unless you're a fake saint and you claim they're not the same thing. If you'd like something more annoying than the water cooler example, here's another: Breaking donuts in half and leaving the half in the box, so nobody wants to eat it. That's not a good example. Around here, almost everybody would grab up that half donut. The squeamish wouldn't take it if they thought you had bitten it in half but, even if it had teeth marks in it, somebody would take it before the end of the day. Yeah, we're a rough crowd. |
OK. Let's crank it up: Someone pours the last of the coffee, puts the pot
back on the burner, and doesn't turn off the heat. The pot cracks. It's the
only pot in the office. Now we're talking grand jury action, you bet.
#33
| |||
| |||
|
|
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:OvjIh.4589$ya1.1621 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny... "dbu" <question-m... (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-9A9E45.14270609032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... No. Waiting for Scott to explain how the courts would get involved with a situation where someone in an office accidentally unplugged the water cooler. He can't. I thought it was about sex in the office. Same thing, unless you're a fake saint and you claim they're not the same thing. If you'd like something more annoying than the water cooler example, here's another: Breaking donuts in half and leaving the half in the box, so nobody wants to eat it. That's not a good example. Around here, almost everybody would grab up that half donut. |
The squeamish wouldn't take it if they thought you had bitten
Quote:
|
it in half but, even if it had teeth marks in it, somebody would take it before the end of the day. |
any other item, just leave it on a table with a "Help Yourself" or
"Free" sign & presto - it's gone!
Cathy
Quote:
|
Yeah, we're a rough crowd. -- Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com |
#34
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <HXjIh.4594$ya1.2592 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "DH" <dh (AT) stargate (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45f1bd49$0$16367$88260bb3 (AT) free (DOT) teranews.com... "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:OvjIh.4589$ya1.1621 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny... "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-9A9E45.14270609032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... No. Waiting for Scott to explain how the courts would get involved with a situation where someone in an office accidentally unplugged the water cooler. He can't. I thought it was about sex in the office. Same thing, unless you're a fake saint and you claim they're not the same thing. If you'd like something more annoying than the water cooler example, here's another: Breaking donuts in half and leaving the half in the box, so nobody wants to eat it. That's not a good example. Around here, almost everybody would grab up that half donut. The squeamish wouldn't take it if they thought you had bitten it in half but, even if it had teeth marks in it, somebody would take it before the end of the day. Yeah, we're a rough crowd. OK. Let's crank it up: Someone pours the last of the coffee, puts the pot back on the burner, and doesn't turn off the heat. The pot cracks. It's the only pot in the office. Now we're talking grand jury action, you bet. get back to the sex in the office. you are diverting attention again. |
OK. Do you want to take over this debate from Scott, or should we wait for
him to come back?
#35
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <45f18a5a$0$16330$88260... (AT) free (DOT) teranews.com>, "DH" <d... (AT) stargate (DOT) com> wrote: "dbu" <question-m... (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-7EBD6C.20212208032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... In article <1173406571.494939.205... (AT) q40g2000cwq (DOT) googlegroups.com>, "AnneCoultersAdamsApple" <annecoultersadamsap... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: On Mar 8, 6:29 pm, dbu <question-m... (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote: In article <1173395434.633437.272... (AT) 30g2000cwc (DOT) googlegroups.com>, "AnneCoultersAdamsApple" <annecoultersadamsap... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: On Mar 8, 4:29 pm, "dbu," <question-m... (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote: In article <1173388840.296102.74... (AT) 8g2000cwh (DOT) googlegroups.com>, "AnneCoultersAdamsApple" <annecoultersadamsap... (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: On Mar 8, 1:42 pm, "Ron" <nobodyh... (AT) nowhere (DOT) org> wrote: Didn't know that about Libby. But it does seem that there are actually just a fairly small number of those "in the loop" in Washington. They, including Bush, Kerry etc. all belong to same clubs, hire same advisors etc. When a Repub or Dem gets voted (or kicked) out office, their staff immediately migrages and is loyal to where ever there is a vacancy regardless of party. Sen/Rep goes to work for a lobbyist he was villifying on Fox or CNN yesterday....... Must be the air or water! Ron in Ca You are aware that the person to be pardoned is guilty of a crime and must be remorsefully? What Libby did is no different than what organized crime figures do - a person keeps thier mouth shut and takes the fall. The crime family takes care of their family, protects them in jail, and give them back their job when they get out. As a former registered republican that still believes "we are a nation of laws and not men", I must say republicans today are not interested in laws, just ideology. Libby was found guilty of his crimes by a jury of his peers. To ask for a pardon is jury nulification but I doubt you agreed with the OJ verdict, which was also jury nulification. Get a grip. Reassess what you are doing, how you are being used by republican people in power. A klinton not only lied, but he lied under oath, perjury, a felony......jail time for klinton, but he wiggled out of it. --- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Your obsession with Clinton is blinding you to this administration's complete disregard for the constitution. Clinton took the impeachment like a man. No whining, no complaining, no one on the left calling for a pardon. I bet Clinton would not accept a pardon. What do you think is going on with the firing of the federal prosecutors? One of Karl Rove's assistants was put into the New Mexico prosecutor position after Cummings was fired. Another was told he was appointed to a federal prosecutor job to get resume experience so he could be appointed a judge. Before you give me a flip answer consider the "consequences" when a dreaded Democratic president has the same powers. A What's your carbon footprint and are you going to purchase offsets? --- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - See? Avoiding the question... Too bad. When people dialog both learn something. I'm buying a Honda Fit. A You didn't get it did ya, LOL. ACAA gets it. You don't. Clinton lied about a BJ. Who cares? It wasn't a proper subject for investigation and questions about the President's sex life shouldn't have been put to him under oath, anyway. As regards a President's sex life, he has only the First Lady (or the First Husband, after Hillary wins) to answer to. The Bush team appears to be illegally using the identity of CIA operatives to foster political advantage. That's illegal, a subversion of Constitutional processes and is a subject appropriate for investigation and questions about it should be put to people under oath. And, of course, the larger picture is that this Administration is so habitually and brazenly deceitful and so thoroughly and hopelessly incompetent that one of them got convicted for lying when there was no reason to lie. Tell the truth, I don't read more than the first sentence of your postings. Started a couple weeks ago when you yet again repeated yourself. bye. |
in here. They actually have reasoned content.
Cathy
Quote:
|
--- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
#36
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <OvjIh.4589$ya1.1621 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-9A9E45.14270609032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... No. Waiting for Scott to explain how the courts would get involved with a situation where someone in an office accidentally unplugged the water cooler. He can't. I thought it was about sex in the office. Same thing, unless you're a fake saint and you claim they're not the same thing. If you'd like something more annoying than the water cooler example, here's another: Breaking donuts in half and leaving the half in the box, so nobody wants to eat it. Or how about leaving the donut box open overnight with day old donuts. Worse yet, leaving an empty open donut box overnight. Now get back to the more serious, SEX in the office. |
Why is it serious? Here's Scott's theory:
Let's say two people happily have sex in the office, and neither of them has
a problem with it. Later, one of them is hauled before a grand jury because
of insider trading. If you were on that jury, and a lawyer asked the
employee "Did you have sex in the office?", what would you think about the
lawyer asking that question?
#37
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <ILkIh.4515$B25.1466 (AT) news01 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-08A489.15433309032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... In article <HXjIh.4594$ya1.2592 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "DH" <dh (AT) stargate (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45f1bd49$0$16367$88260bb3 (AT) free (DOT) teranews.com... "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:OvjIh.4589$ya1.1621 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny... "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-9A9E45.14270609032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... No. Waiting for Scott to explain how the courts would get involved with a situation where someone in an office accidentally unplugged the water cooler. He can't. I thought it was about sex in the office. Same thing, unless you're a fake saint and you claim they're not the same thing. If you'd like something more annoying than the water cooler example, here's another: Breaking donuts in half and leaving the half in the box, so nobody wants to eat it. That's not a good example. Around here, almost everybody would grab up that half donut. The squeamish wouldn't take it if they thought you had bitten it in half but, even if it had teeth marks in it, somebody would take it before the end of the day. Yeah, we're a rough crowd. OK. Let's crank it up: Someone pours the last of the coffee, puts the pot back on the burner, and doesn't turn off the heat. The pot cracks. It's the only pot in the office. Now we're talking grand jury action, you bet. get back to the sex in the office. you are diverting attention again. OK. Do you want to take over this debate from Scott, or should we wait for him to come back? There's no question that Scott has left you speechless. I'm waiting for a response to Scott from you. |
Scott's all done with this. He won't be back. My response is a question for
you, also posted in another message, in case you missed it. Actually, this
was Scott's example:
Let's say two people happily have sex in the office, and neither of them has
a problem with it. Later, one of them is hauled before a grand jury because
of insider trading. If you were on that jury, and a lawyer asked the
employee "Did you have sex in the office?", what would you think about the
lawyer asking that question?
#38
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <%0lIh.4603$ya1.2027 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-885518.16142709032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... In article <ILkIh.4515$B25.1466 (AT) news01 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-08A489.15433309032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... In article <HXjIh.4594$ya1.2592 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "DH" <dh (AT) stargate (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45f1bd49$0$16367$88260bb3 (AT) free (DOT) teranews.com... "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:OvjIh.4589$ya1.1621 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny... "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-9A9E45.14270609032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... No. Waiting for Scott to explain how the courts would get involved with a situation where someone in an office accidentally unplugged the water cooler. He can't. I thought it was about sex in the office. Same thing, unless you're a fake saint and you claim they're not the same thing. If you'd like something more annoying than the water cooler example, here's another: Breaking donuts in half and leaving the half in the box, so nobody wants to eat it. That's not a good example. Around here, almost everybody would grab up that half donut. The squeamish wouldn't take it if they thought you had bitten it in half but, even if it had teeth marks in it, somebody would take it before the end of the day. Yeah, we're a rough crowd. OK. Let's crank it up: Someone pours the last of the coffee, puts the pot back on the burner, and doesn't turn off the heat. The pot cracks. It's the only pot in the office. Now we're talking grand jury action, you bet. get back to the sex in the office. you are diverting attention again. OK. Do you want to take over this debate from Scott, or should we wait for him to come back? There's no question that Scott has left you speechless. I'm waiting for a response to Scott from you. Scott's all done with this. He won't be back. My response is a question for you, also posted in another message, in case you missed it. Actually, this was Scott's example: Let's say two people happily have sex in the office, and neither of them has a problem with it. Later, one of them is hauled before a grand jury because of insider trading. If you were on that jury, and a lawyer asked the employee "Did you have sex in the office?", what would you think about the lawyer asking that question? The prosecutor can ask any question he/she wants to ask. Even the members of the Grand Jury can ask stupid questions, did you know that? Your best bet is to say I don't remember (Bill Clinton) or I don't know and try, try to keep your big mouth shut as much as you can. I know it would be very hard for you. |
unrelated question, not whether is was LEGAL. It would be obvious to any
sentient being that in this context, the question was completely ridiculous.
By the way, I want to thank you for being a perfect example of a
deuterostome, particularly since you never progressed past the stage which
defines the word. You're the poster boy.
#39
| |||
| |||
|
|
"dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-885518.16142709032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... In article <ILkIh.4515$B25.1466 (AT) news01 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-08A489.15433309032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... In article <HXjIh.4594$ya1.2592 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote: "DH" <dh (AT) stargate (DOT) com> wrote in message news:45f1bd49$0$16367$88260bb3 (AT) free (DOT) teranews.com... "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:OvjIh.4589$ya1.1621 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny... "dbu" <question-mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message news:question-mark-9A9E45.14270609032007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com... No. Waiting for Scott to explain how the courts would get involved with a situation where someone in an office accidentally unplugged the water cooler. He can't. I thought it was about sex in the office. Same thing, unless you're a fake saint and you claim they're not the same thing. If you'd like something more annoying than the water cooler example, here's another: Breaking donuts in half and leaving the half in the box, so nobody wants to eat it. That's not a good example. Around here, almost everybody would grab up that half donut. The squeamish wouldn't take it if they thought you had bitten it in half but, even if it had teeth marks in it, somebody would take it before the end of the day. Yeah, we're a rough crowd. OK. Let's crank it up: Someone pours the last of the coffee, puts the pot back on the burner, and doesn't turn off the heat. The pot cracks. It's the only pot in the office. Now we're talking grand jury action, you bet. get back to the sex in the office. you are diverting attention again. OK. Do you want to take over this debate from Scott, or should we wait for him to come back? There's no question that Scott has left you speechless. I'm waiting for a response to Scott from you. Scott's all done with this. He won't be back. My response is a question for you, also posted in another message, in case you missed it. Actually, this was Scott's example: Let's say two people happily have sex in the office, and neither of them has a problem with it. Later, one of them is hauled before a grand jury because of insider trading. If you were on that jury, and a lawyer asked the employee "Did you have sex in the office?", what would you think about the lawyer asking that question? |
#40
| |||
| |||
|
|
Scott's all done with this. He won't be back. |
you...
Starting with you misspelling an outfit you 'said' you worked for....
Ending up with me teaching you about grand juries.....
--
Scott in Florida
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.