Liberal Forum

Huey » 8 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

8 minutes ago

Will you be accepting that your original narrative was wrong?  

And will you, ******, be answering questions today?

Will you be accepting that your original narrative was wrong?  

Were you to show where my " narrative" was wrong.

But you can't. 

And will you, ******, be answering questions today?

Fredo,

That is NEVER the problem. 

Blackvegetable » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

Were you to show where my " narrative" was wrong.

But you can't. 



Fredo,

That is NEVER the problem. 

Describe how self evident evolving works by genetic outcomes living in series parallel time inhabiting space since arrived a fertilized cell and current generation gap still alive since birth every rotation between changing form shaped by specific chromosomes unique to your time living here now among 8.2 billion others in this atmosphere now?

No exceptions by hope, faith, charity, factual dates by relative time logistics measuring mutual time adapting in space inside our own skin since birth.

Relative time lived and relatives still living this rotation regardless latitude(temperate zone seasonal shift today) longitude(one of 24 time zones) existing as spontaneously alive simultaneously here.

Blackvegetable » 14 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

14 minutes ago

Huey » 18 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

18 minutes ago

Will you be accepting that your original narrative was wrong?  

And will you, ******, be answering questions today?

Will you be accepting that your original narrative was wrong?  

Were you to show where my " narrative" was wrong.

But you can't. 

And will you, ******, be answering questions today?

Fredo,

That is NEVER the problem. 

 

I did.  When I posted the the errors and the correction in your cut and paste.

******, you need better sources.  DOn't bring anymore **** from the daily beast, prick.
 

Huey » 12 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

12 minutes ago

I did.  When I posted the the errors and the correction in your cut and paste.

******, you need better sources.  DOn't bring anymore **** from the daily beast, prick.

But you haven't...

This isn't about "all you know"....it is about the facts....

******, you need better sources.

No, I don't.....my sources didn't miss anything. 

 

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 1:19 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 1:19 pm

In appealing the verdict, Rosen said Botelho admitted to voting in his name, but Grafton County Superior Court precluded that evidence from the trial and denied Rosen's request for a Richards hearing to address Botelho's testimony. 

A Richards hearing is a legal proceeding that investigates the circumstances surrounding an alleged violation of discovery rules. 

The Supreme Court agreed with Rosen and overturned the verdict, saying the trial court incurred unfair prejudice in the jury by withholding this evidence.

"Should Botelho on remand assert his Fifth Amendment rights, the trial court shall conduct a (Richards) hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the defendant's conviction and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion," the Supreme Court said.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/con ... 00262.html

Before I go any further, demonstrate thar you understand the meaning of the text in bold.

ALL Superior Court rulings are REMANDED to the lower courts to CORRECT THEIR MISTAKES, ****!!

You're lack of ANY LEGAL KNOWLEDGE on how courts operate ONLY PROVES how **** full of **** you really are.

Or rather HOW **** MORONIC you are. But you really want people to think you are somehow "smart" when your OWN WORDS prove you're a **** IDIOT!!

Scrèèeeeeeeeech..

Blackvegetable » 24 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

24 minutes ago

Huey » 33 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

33 minutes ago

I did.  When I posted the the errors and the correction in your cut and paste.

******, you need better sources.  DOn't bring anymore **** from the daily beast, prick.

But you haven't...

This isn't about "all you know"....it is about the facts....

******, you need better sources.

No, I don't.....my sources didn't miss anything. 

 

 

The facts are the man is not being prosecuted as we speak.  The facts are the conviction was VOIDED by the NH Supreme Court.

You lose ******.  You gonna tell us who led you to the daily beast article?

Huey » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

4 minutes ago

The facts are the man is not being prosecuted as we speak.  The facts are the conviction was VOIDED by the NH Supreme Court.

You lose ******.  You gonna tell us who led you to the daily beast article?

You're  like the juror number 12 hold out in the Clancy trial Huey.

It's  a beautiful day..
 
I wish you both could rest your cases..

We should discuss Kushner and Witkoff going to Moscow...
 

Johnny You » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

7 minutes ago

You're  like the juror number 12 hold out in the Clancy trial Huey.

It's  a beautiful day..
 
I wish you both could rest your cases..

I will say it again, the precedence of this case was just another social enactment of Casey Anthony case 16 years later. Psychological class warfare from within the same reality called United States of America on the world stages of making believe now isn't eternity as a species.

Want another example, the Billings' murders in Florida. it exposed DCF programs creating the situation it happened.

Johnny » wrote:

03 Feb 1970, 4:22 pm

Huey » 19 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

19 minutes ago

The facts are the man is not being prosecuted as we speak.  The facts are the conviction was VOIDED by the NH Supreme Court.

You lose ******.  You gonna tell us who led you to the daily beast article?

You're  like the juror number 12 hold out in the Clancy trial Huey.

It's  a beautiful day..
 
I wish you both could rest your cases..

We should discuss Kushner and Witkoff going to Moscow...
 

 

My case is has been put to rest.  He was wrong.  And he won't shut up.  What ****** likes to do is continue to rant and are, to reframe, hoping the other poster says something wrong on his reframe.  Then he runs like the ****** he really is from his ****.

Wan't happen here.  He should researched further but did not.  Particularly when dealing with a source like the Daily Beast.

Huey » 35 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

35 minutes ago

The facts are the man is not being prosecuted as we speak.  

Stop right there.


Why is he "in negotiations" with the AG of NH?

Beekeeper » 51 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

51 minutes ago

ALL Superior Court rulings are REMANDED to the lower courts to CORRECT THEIR MISTAKES, ****!!


 

But not all are retried..

The State has him dead to rights.

The votes were cast, in his name, repeatedly.

There's no debating, or voiding that fact.

This is a felony, the gardner can be obliged to testify in NH. As the Supreme Court’s opinion clearly recognizes.

Hence his chats with the AG.

 

Blackvegetable » Today, 5:25 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 5:25 am

JuCo,

Don't trigger @*TinyVictim's MIchael Flynn PTSD.

I KILL at this stuff.

You'd be a bug bracing for the windshield.

more like suicide…
 

Blackvegetable » 15 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

15 minutes ago

Huey » 50 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

50 minutes ago

The facts are the man is not being prosecuted as we speak.  

Stop right there.


Why is he "in negotiations" with the AG of NH?

 

 Oh, I am stopped.  My case was successful.  Negotiating is not being prosecuted.

What source, ******, gave you the Daily Beast story?  Remember what you said about not giving sources, ******.
 

Blackvegetable » Today, 5:27 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 5:27 am

So you don't think a "Colt" branded pocket knife, with a "tactical" tag, is gay?

what’s “gay” is you ASSumed it was a CC handgun…

​​​​​​​nod…

ROG62 » 16 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

16 minutes ago

what’s “gay” is you ASSumed it was a CC handgun…

nod…

Show me where I did so...

Huey » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

17 minutes ago

 Oh, I am stopped.  My case

Again....this is not about "all you know"...

It is about the facts.

As a matter of fact, you've now dodged this question for a day...after demanding that I prove it was happening. 


The ball, somehow, is never in your court.

ROG62 » 23 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

23 minutes ago

more like suicide…

Then go ahead and trigger @*TinyVictim's Michael Flynn PTSD.....I don't care..

CONCORD — The New Hampshire Supreme Court on April 9 overturned businessman Richard Rosen’s illegal voting conviction, ruling the trial court judge was wrong to suppress evidence that another man confessed to casting the illegal vote.

the judge should have thrown the case out solely on this evidence, not suppress it…WTF?
 

Blackvegetable » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

17 minutes ago

Show me where I did so...

we “know” you did…