|
|
| Bundy Brothers Acquitted (1400039) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
| (1400039) | |
Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Oct 27 21:49:15 2016 Of seizing a federal wildlife refuge and fire arm charges. |
|
|
| (1400050) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Oct 27 23:48:21 2016, in response to Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Oct 27 21:49:15 2016. They're still holding them on the Nevada charges. And they tased the Bundys' lawyer. |
|
|
| (1400066) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 07:26:02 2016, in response to Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Oct 27 21:49:15 2016. I loved how the prosecutor introduced into evidence over 30 guns and more than 16,000 rounds of ammunition, and the jury acquitted the Bundys of illegal possession of firearms in a federal facility. LOL! |
|
|
| (1400068) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Fri Oct 28 08:30:13 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 07:26:02 2016. Heh. That's the jury's right, bizarre as it sometimes turns out. |
|
|
| (1400098) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Oct 28 10:55:24 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 07:26:02 2016. That's because per the Second Amendment, it is not illegal or unconstitutional; but having such "federal facilit(ies)" is. |
|
|
| (1400101) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Oct 28 10:59:51 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Oct 28 10:55:24 2016. LOL! |
|
|
| (1400201) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 22:17:43 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Oct 28 10:59:51 2016. IAWTP. |
|
|
| (1400207) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Oct 28 22:29:23 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 22:17:43 2016. Looks like you need to brush up on the Constitution too. Especially Article 2; please find the authorization, or the permission, for the executive branch to acquire such large swaths of land for itself. |
|
|
| (1400212) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 22:49:32 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Oct 28 22:29:23 2016. LOL! |
|
|
| (1400213) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 00:08:36 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 22:49:32 2016. IAWTLOL! |
|
|
| (1400214) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 00:09:01 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Oct 28 22:29:23 2016. It’s in Article I, idiot. |
|
|
| (1400216) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 01:06:19 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Dave on Fri Oct 28 22:49:32 2016. OK, don't. (BTW, that is ad lapidem.) |
|
|
| (1400217) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 01:10:33 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 00:09:01 2016. No it is not, liar. Everything in Article I has to do with Congress and not the executive branch. And the Tenth Amendment forbids them from empowering the executive branch beyond its remit.You make salaam look like a genius, on this score. |
|
|
| (1400233) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 10:50:16 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 01:10:33 2016. You clearly know nothing about the Constitution. |
|
|
| (1400237) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Oct 29 10:56:41 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 01:10:33 2016. Bummer for you that the entire Supreme Court, including the late Justice Scalia, disagrees with you. |
|
|
| (1400238) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Sat Oct 29 11:05:31 2016, in response to Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Oct 27 21:49:15 2016. They should still face charges of destruction of Federal property, which was rampant during their occupation of a Federal facility. And they'll see sentences at the max for it, like an OJ Simpson treatment.Those guys deseve to be in prison for a long long time. Violent occupation of Federal property should never be handled lightly. Conspiracy is hard to prove. Armed insurrection is much easier. These are dangerous people and they belong in prison, so society is safe from them. |
|
|
| (1400251) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 14:32:10 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 10:50:16 2016. LOL! Knew you wouldn't be able to find what you claimed was in Article I, because it ain't there.Only takes being able to read to see that nothing about the executive branch is in Article I. Especially anything about Congress giving the executive the equivalent of "King's Lands". Why do you hate the USA so much? |
|
|
| (1400254) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 14:56:05 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 14:32:10 2016. You are full of shit.I'd respond to your points, but I'd rather not. If a more reasonable poster had some questions about the Constitution, I'd answer them. But responding to you is as ridiculous as Bill Nye debating Ken Ham. |
|
|
| (1400263) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 17:50:46 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 14:56:05 2016. LOL, it's OK to admit you can't prove your contention. (Never mind piling on more ad lapidem to boot.) You'll feel better admitting it. |
|
|
| (1400288) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 20:41:41 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 29 17:50:46 2016. I don’t need to give proof of its absurdity. The post started with Posted by Olog-hai. . . |
|
|
| (1400320) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Sun Oct 30 01:35:58 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 20:41:41 2016. Pwn3d |
|
|
| (1400325) | |
Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Oct 30 02:56:46 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 29 20:41:41 2016. Repeat of ad lapidem with ad hominem. Two logical fallacies in a row! You're 0 for 4 at least. |
|
|
| (1400326) | |
Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Oct 30 02:57:07 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by TerrApin Station on Sun Oct 30 01:35:58 2016. There's no pwn4ge in logical fallacies, antisemite. |
|
|
| (1400339) | |
Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Sun Oct 30 09:03:28 2016, in response to Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Oct 30 02:57:07 2016. Says the one who likes nazis |
|
|
| (1400345) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Mitch45 on Sun Oct 30 09:58:36 2016, in response to Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by R2ChinaTown on Thu Oct 27 21:49:15 2016. Can we get a WHOA BUNDY? |
|
|
| (1400352) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Oct 30 11:02:23 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by Mitch45 on Sun Oct 30 09:58:36 2016. 
|
|
|
| (1400353) | |
Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Oct 30 11:07:24 2016, in response to Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside, posted by ClearAspect on Sun Oct 30 09:03:28 2016. That'd be you who likes Nazis, tough guy. Insisting that they are what they are not (on the right) is the definition of liking them. |
|
|
| (1400354) | |
Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Oct 30 11:08:10 2016, in response to Re: Bundy Brothers Acquitted, posted by SelkirkTMO on Sun Oct 30 11:02:23 2016. Heh, more cheers for statism. |
|
|
| (1400379) | |
Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside |
|
|
Posted by ClearAspect on Sun Oct 30 14:01:56 2016, in response to Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside, posted by Olog-hai on Sun Oct 30 11:07:24 2016. Horrible try, you try to turn things into nazi arguments when you have nothing to use innyour discussion. Stick to your knowledge of the communist constitution cause you have NO knowledge of the American One |
|
|
| (1400381) | |
Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Oct 30 14:05:43 2016, in response to Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside, posted by ClearAspect on Sun Oct 30 14:01:56 2016. PWN3D! |
|
|
| (1400530) | |
Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYMAN on Mon Oct 31 03:30:45 2016, in response to Re: Lib media op-ed: Democratic Party should ask Hillary to step aside, posted by ClearAspect on Sun Oct 30 14:01:56 2016. Good one! |
|
|