I don't have to prove you are wrong. You can believe what ever you want.
I think it is sort of funny that a person who will not do the research will continue to think they are right and think the other, who did do the research, is wrong. Stupid people are funny.

 

YOU,,, are dismissed,, you are a fraud.

 

You call me a fraud?
I live in Ms. and know Haley.
Now you, you don't know shit and refuse to learn.
That makes you stupid and ignorant.

 

You haven't proven anything of the sort, you only throw and shit and hope that it sticks to something.

I'm still waiting on you to show me where I am being steered wrong, not too sure why you haven't done that yet.

I suppose you would rather keep on talking hoping to convince someone, that your bullshit is more factual than mine.


STILL WAITING. **tick tock*** ***tick tock***

 

Sorry man, I had to spend some time in MS, couldn't help giving you a poke.

 

Okay, this is Clarise being a dweeb.

I'm not into celeb gossip.

I thought the glove didn't fit. I thought Simpson was cleared of all charges. He's in prison? What the hell for?

Probably a really dumb question, but I'm honestly asking and I have no intention of learning the idiot's life story. :|

 

He tried to retrieve some items he claimed were his from a sports memorabilia dealer in a Las Vegas hotel room...at gunpoint with his thugs in tow. Nevada gave him 30 years on kidnapping, armed robbery, etc. KARMA!

 

He wasn't cleared of the charges he was acquitted there's a difference. If he had been cleared of the charges he wouldn't have lost the wrongful death lawsuit.

 

LOL.

Leopards don't change their spots, huh?

I served jury duty only once in my life. Why? 'cause I got blacklisted for saying essentially the above to a judge.

True story:

In Massachusetts, in Jury Duty, you have to fill out a little card in the waiting room where you can claim hardship to weasel your way out of getting empaneled. Here's what I wrote:

If a civil case, find for defendant.
If a criminal case, find for plaintif.
​

The judge called me to the bench and said, "Miss P____, explain this."

I replied, "Civil tort law abrogates personal responsibility, so I oppose it on principle and sympathize for the accused. As for criminal law, where there's smoke there's fire. If the perp didn't commit the crime that's brought him here today, he's guilty of a hundred others. Your Honor."

The judge said, "Get the hell out of my courtroom."

And I haven't been invited back since.

Sheesh.

 

Uhhh... I don't know much about the case. And I'm not a lawyer.

But there's this thing in the United States called "innocent until proven guilty." If they fail to convict you, they acquit you. Meaning, the default status stands. Meaning, you're innocent.

Civil trials have less stringent rules of evidence and discovery, and plaintifs' cases need not be as strict. That is why I oppose tort law on principle. In my view, it is tantamount to double jeopardy. (See above)

 

I tell them I've been victim of crime and tend to think everyone is guilty. Bet the judge loved you.

 

Not to mention in a criminal charge you must prove beyond any reasonable doubt, whereas in civil case evidence only has to tip the scales to probability of guilt. I agree with you, acquitted of murder charge should protect him from civil liability on same murder. Then again, hope he dies poor and in prison.

 

wow...

 

Do you really have to have someone hold your hand?
In real life can you do anything for yourself?
That is why this country is in the shape it is, people who have to be lead by the hand everywhere. People who cannot or will not do anything for themselves. People always demanding others do their work for them.
Grow a pair.

 

I have the entire world at my fingertips, and so do you,,PROVE that I am wrong.

 

I have the entire world at my fingertips, and so do you,,PROVE that I am being mislead, prove that I am wrong about Barbour's pardons.

ALONG,,with you showing me that those he did pardon, killed again as you may have suggested.

 

I don't get this. It looks like Ace did some research and came up with numbers that power says are wrong but can't/won't offer correct information. This leaves independent observers to wonder how much smoke power is blowing?

 

I think the part you missed is he didn't do any research. Couldn't have, he was on here all of the time. He just didn't have any time to do any research.
Haley was the governor of Ms. I live in Ms. I know Haley. The local news stations did a pretty good job of letting people know who was pardoned, what crime they had committed, and kept up with those who were pardoned.
The result was that some people were killed by some pardoned people. It didn't take very long. Another result is Haley will never be able to run for president which was something he planned on doing. He couldn't even carry his home state.
Sometimes people will refuse to do any research and demand others do it for them.

I will make a bet with Ace. If I show proof a person that Haley pardoned was involved in killing another person he has to leave the forum.
Time to put up or shut up.

 

So, power, post your evidence that refutes his post. Just telling him that he is wrong doesn't prove anything. Do you honestly believe that he made that all up? Today's computers can allow one to be here and allow one to look at other web sites, too, at the same time.