youtube

[solus]

Deflection and obfuscation, and a intentional distortion of what is clearly heard on the video. Liberals always resort to this tactic when they are on the wrong side of a issue, and liberals are on the wrong side of every issue.

If a cop pulled me when I was not speeding and he is going to issue a ticket I will state, "Well, officer, why don't you go ahead and write the ticket and I'll see you in court." It is funny how some cops will provide proof of their unlawful acts.

RSMo 575.080

and i am sure you would have enjoyed taking care of your citation rolling through the judicial system.

sure the cite to mo statutes was appropriate

ipse

 

[since9]

My father is a retired cop and our debates are frequent and heated, with the end result being the same every single time. He can't even agree to disagree! He actually brags about violating peoples rights and doesn't seem to have any shred of remorse. I will never understand that part of him.

Dario, there are a dozen people in my life, most immediate or extended family, whom I love dearly.

At one point or another I had to realize a handful of their were arrogant pricks.

 

[since9]

I'm seriously thinking about joining this kid for a walk about... This is how it all starts.

I am seriously thinking about finding out who this officer is, buying him lunch and flipping each and every self-justified statement he comes up with around into reality so that he (hopefully) comes to realize what a ridiculously Constitution-violating retard he was being in the video.

I am growing very tired of otherwise apparently intelligence law enforcement officers flagrantly exhibiting their gross ignorance for simple want of a single Sunday afternoon reading through our nation's Constitution and 27 Amendments.

Gross buffoonery ill becomes any uniform-wearing officer of the law.

 

[OC for ME]

and i am sure you would have enjoyed taking care of your citation rolling through the judicial system.

sure the cite to mo statutes was appropriate

ipse

Had to consider the above response and have come to the conlusion that it, the above response, is no different than any other liberal response.

For those who are not familiar with MO statutes, a citation issued without basis in fact is a misdemeanor offense. Just cuz some folks don't like the law being used against the law is not my problem.

solus, in my view, is nothing more than another liberal with a gun.

 

[SteveInCO]

Had to consider the above response and have come to the conlusion that it, the above response, is no For those who are not familiar with MO statutes

Missouri statutes are utterly irrelevant here, as Solus pointed out, yet you continue to babble as if they matter.

 

[OC for ME]

Missouri statutes are utterly irrelevant here, as Solus pointed out, yet you continue to babble as if they matter.

And...you ignore my point. Or, fail to comprehend it.

 

[Dario]

According to the person that recorded this video the criminal case was dismissed for lack of evidence (no surprise here) and he is planning on filing a civil suit.

 

[The Truth]

According to the person that recorded this video the criminal case was dismissed for lack of evidence (no surprise here) and he is planning on filing a civil suit.

Hey whaddya know, I was RIGHT ALL ALONG.

Awaiting solus's apology...

 

[Dario]

Hey whaddya know, I was RIGHT ALL ALONG.

Awaiting solus's apology...

:crickets:

It was glaringly obvious to me from the beginning but I also saw I was being baited early in the thread, took you a while to realize you were

 

[solus]

According to the person that recorded this video the criminal case was dismissed for lack of evidence (no surprise here) and he is planning on filing a civil suit.

of course i am sure you did Dario...but, as is an accustomed feature on this forum, Dario, do you have a cite or some objective evidence to substantiate your statement ~ other than off the offender's FB page?? (sure there would be no bravado exhibited there huh?)

oh 'the truth' for shame... you jumped on the their bandwagon without any type of unbiased or objective evidence, truly a newbie's error ~ and i thought you knew better...sigh!!

oh and 'the truth', i have a bridge for sale in AZ...no wait someone else is using it for a resort...naw'll i like you so i will still sell it to you at a bargain price. :lol:

ipse

 

[The Truth]

of course i am sure you did Dario...but, as is an accustomed feature on this forum, Dario, do you have a cite or some objective evidence to substantiate your statement ~ other than off the offender's FB page?? (sure there would be no bravado exhibited there huh?)

oh 'the truth' for shame... you jumped on the their bandwagon without any type of unbiased or objective evidence, truly a newbie's error ~ and i thought you knew better...sigh!!

oh and 'the truth', i have a bridge for sale in AZ...no wait someone else is using it for a resort...naw'll i like you so i will still sell it to you at a bargain price. :lol:

ipse

I hereby re-name you "trollus." HAHAH!

 

[solus]

I hereby re-name you "trollus." HAHAH!

excuse me, didn't you just this afternoon in another thread self profess you are a mature individual, here you are shilling at calling members names...ya obvious maturity exhibited 'the truth'...and even primus nailed you...quite pleasant!!

still awaiting for objective evidence from Dario...

ipse

 

[Dario]

still awaiting for objective evidence from Dario...

ipse

I don't have any. He is obviously guilty of something and I'm sure he is lying and really got 6 years hard labor in a North Korean prison for his obstruction charge.

You win. Congratulations.

Added: Love the "offender" label from post #110. It says so much with just one word. Kind of like guilty until proven innocent (even when there's not enough evidence to take it to trial). Well played sir.

 

[solus]

I don't have any. He is obviously guilty of something and I'm sure he is lying and really got 6 years hard labor in a North Korean prison for his obstruction charge.

You win. Congratulations.

i truly don't want capitulation from anyone Dario, truly interested in objective evidence as mandated by common courtesy when you make pronunciations such as you have based on hearsay FB bravado. you attribute your source of information from the same idiot savant who got into trouble in the first place...of course he got off, ask him; sure he is going to file a civil suit ~ cuz he says so!!

such FB bravado is common place in the world of social media these days.

BTW prime recent example of false bravado ~ bush's bravado knew, w/o objective evidence, there was WMD in Iraq and so forth as he sent troops to chase his and his father's mythical Be'elzebuth throughout the middle east.

American ppl still did nothing what so ever when it was discovered we were lied to...

ipse

 

[Dario]

Hey I'm just the messenger man. Hands up, don't shoot.

 

[Dario]

BTW prime recent example of false bravado ~ bush's bravado knew, w/o objective evidence, there was WMD in Iraq and so forth as he sent troops to chase his and his father's mythical Be'elzebuth throughout the middle east.

American ppl still did nothing what so ever when it was discovered we were lied to...

ipse

Wow, really? You almost make this too easy bro:

WMD's found in Iraq, unreported

Not to mention the comparison of sending a country to war based on "false bravado," to _claiming charges were dropped against you for an obstruction charge_ on facebook is a bit of a leap, no?

 

[solus]

Wow, really? You almost make this too easy bro:

WMD's found in Iraq, unreported

Not to mention the comparison of sending a country to war based on "false bravado," to _claiming charges were dropped against you for an obstruction charge_ on facebook is a bit of a leap, no?

quote from the NY Times article:
all had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them. unquote.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/100000003173431.mobile.html?_r=1

bush contended WMD were ready to be used against Iraq's citizens and any other ethnic or terrorist groups.

finding dumps w/munitions long discarded and in complete inoperable condition does not quite meet bush's criteria...

tho the times article was truly an interesting read...thanks for finding it...

now about confirmation of your other information?

ipse

 

[Dario]

quote from the NY Times article:
all had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them. unquote.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/100000003173431.mobile.html?_r=1

bush contended WMD were ready to be used against Iraq's citizens and any other ethnic or terrorist groups.

finding dumps w/munitions long discarded and in complete inoperable condition does not quite meet bush's criteria...

tho the times article was truly an interesting read...thanks for finding it...

Good find. After I posted the link I was worried you wouldn't make it past the yahoo post to the NYT article.

The part you underlined is a good example that the intent was possibly there, however the capabilities of carrying out the intent may not have been there (and for the record I never supported that war). Regardless, a presidential statement does not equate to rule of law otherwise we'd all be able to keep our same doctors and there would be no Islamic caliphate in Iraq once withdrew our occupation either.

now about confirmation of your other information?

ipse

I told you I don't have it. I don't have the time or finances to drive to Aurora and file a FOIA. Then again, I don't believe the burden of proof is on the accused. Do you?

 

[solus]

Good find. After I posted the link I was worried you wouldn't make it past the yahoo post to the NYT article.

The part you underlined is a good example that the intent was possibly there, however the capabilities of carrying out the intent may not have been there (and for the record I never supported that war). Regardless, a presidential statement does not equate to rule of law otherwise we'd all be able to keep our same doctors and there would be no Islamic caliphate in Iraq once withdrew our occupation either.

I told you I don't have it. I don't have the time or finances to drive to Aurora and file a FOIA. Then again, I don't believe the burden of proof is on the accused. Do you?

lol, really, ye of so little faith....of course i will go past the first fluff...how am i to learn and ed-u-ma-kate myself!

btw historians will mark the conflict off as junior (read chaney, rumsfield, et al) finishing off daddy's business.

finally, let's call it a draw or tie regarding aurora's idiot savant for the moment shall we...fair?

ipse