No questions, dick sucker.
Life is too short.Cannonpointer » 20 Jun 2024, 3:22 pm » wrote: ↑ Which jury was that, pookie bear?
I heard it through the grapevine that they found him guilty of libel.
Okay, fruity. A non sequitur.Blackvegetable » 20 Jun 2024, 3:22 pm » wrote: ↑ Every one of the past 25 summers, you've given the same speech....
At the Cyril Eaton-Hogg Retreat for Wan Lads.
Especially when you line up like a chump to take the Trump vaccine, stupid cow.
My bad
They should have made it Cyril. You **** it up - but your instincts were correct.Blackvegetable » 20 Jun 2024, 3:27 pm » wrote: ↑ My bad
The Sir Denis Eton-Hogg Retreat for Wan Lads.
It couldn't be. He'd have to be a person.*rippy38 » 20 Jun 2024, 2:22 pm » wrote: ↑ Dude, I've got about 100 other pressing matters in front one me today, and you ain't one of 'em.
At this point I'm just popping in an out long enough to bitch slap the piss out you, and then it's back to the task at hand.
It's nothing personal.
Yes, really.Beekeeper » 21 Jun 2024, 6:18 am » wrote: ↑ Oh really now??
So if that is the case, EXPLAIN how a judge's "law" is overturned ON APPEAL and their cases even DISMISSED because of the "judge's law" didn't me the LEGAL STANDARDS for "the law"??
Hell, judges are often REMOVED, IMPEACHED, and kicked off the bench for being "the law" that isn't THE ACTUAL LAW!!
When Tiny does this it is Hueycide by Google.Beekeeper » 21 Jun 2024, 7:05 am » wrote: ↑ Except when they AREN'T REALLY.....
Misbehaving Attorneys, Angry Judges, and the Need for a Balanced Approach to the Reviewability of Findings of Misconduct on JSTOR
EDUCATE yourself, **** Dr. Dick Sucker!!
Stick to molesting apiary.Beekeeper » 21 Jun 2024, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑ MORE education for you, Dr. Dick Sucker!! In this ONE STATE ALONE.....
Judicial Discipline (JQC) Cases - Supreme Court (flcourts.gov)
Damn, we can keep these BITCH SLAPPINGS coming all day long if you want!!
you're an idiot.Beekeeper » 21 Jun 2024, 7:12 am » wrote: ↑ Those BITCH SLAPS really SUCK don't they Dr. DIck Sucker??
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Blackvegetable » 21 Jun 2024, 7:15 am » wrote: ↑ you're an idiot.
Why should I waste my time pointing it out to you?
What are the odds that you will acknowledge the evidence of your idiocy?Beekeeper » 21 Jun 2024, 7:24 am » wrote: ↑ You should!! Seeing how you THINK you are always right!!
But then again, you pull this **** CONSTANTLY, puff out your chest and thump it a few times and then claim "victory"!!
When in reality, your *** is one mess of bloody pulp and nothing less.
Blackvegetable » 21 Jun 2024, 7:26 am » wrote: ↑ What are the odds that you will acknowledge the evidence of your idiocy?
I have taken issue with his claim that the judge is the law. He's right, of course - judges are absolute emperors IN THE COURTROOM. But their opinion about a verdict shared with some journalist isn't a judicial act - which is why I took issue with the fruitcake.Beekeeper » 21 Jun 2024, 7:24 am » wrote: ↑ You should!! Seeing how you THINK you are always right!!
But then again, you pull this **** CONSTANTLY, puff out your chest and thump it a few times and then claim "victory"!!
When in reality, your *** is one mess of bloody pulp and nothing less.
That's the point.Beekeeper » 21 Jun 2024, 7:38 am » wrote: ↑ What are the ODDS you can make me!!
I give it better than 1,000,000:1
Either PROVE your point or SHUT THE **** UP!!
GO!!