Republican Dirty Politics

[bripat9643]

It was Republicans who lied about Obamacare

Death Panels, it will destroy the economy, Government Takeover of healthcare, you will be forced to take their doctors, it will fund abortions

As compared to what, Commie Care will save families $2,500 a year on healthcare insurance? Everybody would be able to afford coverage? There will be no bad policies? You can keep your doctor, health facility and insurance company?

All lies if you ask me.

I examined Obama's 2008 inauguration speech, and I counted 22 lies in it.

22 lies according to you. And you make up shit constantly.

And Trump lied 5000 times according to you.

Not according to me. Trump has made over 5000 false or misleading statements according to the Washington Post....who has a running list of every false or misleading statement.

Analysis | President Trump has made more than 5,000 false or misleading claims

With you laughably insisting that any evidence of Trump's lies are 'fake news'.

Only fat homosexual idiots accept the Washington Post as a credible source.

 

[Skylar]

As compared to what, Commie Care will save families $2,500 a year on healthcare insurance? Everybody would be able to afford coverage? There will be no bad policies? You can keep your doctor, health facility and insurance company?

All lies if you ask me.

I examined Obama's 2008 inauguration speech, and I counted 22 lies in it.

22 lies according to you. And you make up shit constantly.

And Trump lied 5000 times according to you.

Not according to me. Trump has made over 5000 false or misleading statements according to the Washington Post....who has a running list of every false or misleading statement.

Analysis | President Trump has made more than 5,000 false or misleading claims

With you laughably insisting that any evidence of Trump's lies are 'fake news'.

Only fat homosexual idiots accept the Washington Post as a credible source.

In comparison to what? You citing yourself?

Tell us again about the Miranda requirements so you can demonstrate how useless you citing you is as a source of information.

And for the giggles. Its always fun to just watch you make shit up.

 

[bripat9643]

Voters support Mueller's investigation and believe he should be given all the time he needs to complete his investigation.

Mueller is a Republican appointment

Democrats had no input to his selection or anyone on his staff

They actually did because Rosenstein is a deep state douchebag. He's on the same side as the Dims: absolute power. **** what the voters want.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Why does virtually every right wing talking point center on the most inane, batshit conspiracy theories backed by nothing?

I mean, your ilk even reimagine the law, making up a new version of the Miranda requirements that don't actually exist. And then insist that the *actual* courts must use whatever your ilk imagined.

Um......that's not how reality works.

Your belief that the FBI can trick people into allowing themselves to be interrogated without a lawyer present is thoroughly totalitarian and un-american. You're boot-licking Stalinist piece of shit, not to mention a fat ugly homosexual.

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

 

[Skylar]

Mueller is a Republican appointment

Democrats had no input to his selection or anyone on his staff

They actually did because Rosenstein is a deep state douchebag. He's on the same side as the Dims: absolute power. **** what the voters want.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Why does virtually every right wing talking point center on the most inane, batshit conspiracy theories backed by nothing?

I mean, your ilk even reimagine the law, making up a new version of the Miranda requirements that don't actually exist. And then insist that the *actual* courts must use whatever your ilk imagined.

Um......that's not how reality works.

Your belief that the FBI can trick people into allowing themselves to be interrogated without a lawyer present is thoroughly totalitarian and un-american. You're boot-licking Stalinist piece of shit, not to mention a fat ugly homosexual.

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

 

[Wyatt earp]

They actually did because Rosenstein is a deep state douchebag. He's on the same side as the Dims: absolute power. **** what the voters want.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Why does virtually every right wing talking point center on the most inane, batshit conspiracy theories backed by nothing?

I mean, your ilk even reimagine the law, making up a new version of the Miranda requirements that don't actually exist. And then insist that the *actual* courts must use whatever your ilk imagined.

Um......that's not how reality works.

Your belief that the FBI can trick people into allowing themselves to be interrogated without a lawyer present is thoroughly totalitarian and un-american. You're boot-licking Stalinist piece of shit, not to mention a fat ugly homosexual.

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

Being detained by the law is in custody .


.

 

[Skylar]

Says you, citing your imagination.

Why does virtually every right wing talking point center on the most inane, batshit conspiracy theories backed by nothing?

I mean, your ilk even reimagine the law, making up a new version of the Miranda requirements that don't actually exist. And then insist that the *actual* courts must use whatever your ilk imagined.

Um......that's not how reality works.

Your belief that the FBI can trick people into allowing themselves to be interrogated without a lawyer present is thoroughly totalitarian and un-american. You're boot-licking Stalinist piece of shit, not to mention a fat ugly homosexual.

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

Being detained by the law is in custody .


.

And who, pray tell, claim that Flynn was 'detained'.

There's you, citing yourself. And....who else? Not Flynn. Not any judge. Not the prosecutors. Not Flynn's lawyers.

Just your imagination. Do you see why your imagination might not be terribly compelling in an actual court of law?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Your belief that the FBI can trick people into allowing themselves to be interrogated without a lawyer present is thoroughly totalitarian and un-american. You're boot-licking Stalinist piece of shit, not to mention a fat ugly homosexual.

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

Being detained by the law is in custody .


.

And who, pray tell, claim that Flynn was 'detained'.

There's you, citing yourself. And....who else? Not Flynn. Not any judge. Not the prosecutors. Not Flynn's lawyers.

Just your imagination. Do you see why your imagination might not be terribly compelling in an actual court of law?

It's funny how you ***** and moan the law kills kneegrows yet defend the law when going against a ******* 1966 supreme Court ruling..


.

 

[bripat9643]

They actually did because Rosenstein is a deep state douchebag. He's on the same side as the Dims: absolute power. **** what the voters want.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Why does virtually every right wing talking point center on the most inane, batshit conspiracy theories backed by nothing?

I mean, your ilk even reimagine the law, making up a new version of the Miranda requirements that don't actually exist. And then insist that the *actual* courts must use whatever your ilk imagined.

Um......that's not how reality works.

Your belief that the FBI can trick people into allowing themselves to be interrogated without a lawyer present is thoroughly totalitarian and un-american. You're boot-licking Stalinist piece of shit, not to mention a fat ugly homosexual.

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

The so-called "federal investigators" didn't make it known they were investigating anything, douchebag.

 

[Skylar]

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

Being detained by the law is in custody .


.

And who, pray tell, claim that Flynn was 'detained'.

There's you, citing yourself. And....who else? Not Flynn. Not any judge. Not the prosecutors. Not Flynn's lawyers.

Just your imagination. Do you see why your imagination might not be terribly compelling in an actual court of law?

It's funny how you ***** and moan the law kills kneegrows yet defend the law when going against a ******* 1966 supreme Court ruling..


.

The problem with your logic is......the only one saying that Michael Flynn was detained is you. Citing your imagination. And your imagination doesn't establish a violation of a '******* 1966 supreme court ruling'.

It merely establishes whatever you choose to make up, based on nothing.

Can you see why your imagination doesn't amount to much as a legal argument?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

Being detained by the law is in custody .


.

And who, pray tell, claim that Flynn was 'detained'.

There's you, citing yourself. And....who else? Not Flynn. Not any judge. Not the prosecutors. Not Flynn's lawyers.

Just your imagination. Do you see why your imagination might not be terribly compelling in an actual court of law?

It's funny how you ***** and moan the law kills kneegrows yet defend the law when going against a ******* 1966 supreme Court ruling..


.

The problem with your logic is......the only one saying that Michael Flynn was detained is you. Citing your imagination. And your imagination doesn't establish a violation of a '******* 1966 supreme court ruling'.

It merely establishes whatever you choose to make up, based on nothing.

Can you see why your imagination doesn't amount to much as a legal argument?

Your the one trying to skirt supreme Court ruling not me...



Have you ever been arrested? It's obvious powder puff you have not..


.

 

[Skylar]

Says you, citing your imagination.

Why does virtually every right wing talking point center on the most inane, batshit conspiracy theories backed by nothing?

I mean, your ilk even reimagine the law, making up a new version of the Miranda requirements that don't actually exist. And then insist that the *actual* courts must use whatever your ilk imagined.

Um......that's not how reality works.

Your belief that the FBI can trick people into allowing themselves to be interrogated without a lawyer present is thoroughly totalitarian and un-american. You're boot-licking Stalinist piece of shit, not to mention a fat ugly homosexual.

What 'interrogation'? Again, you've imagined it. Just like your imagined your 'stalinist' hysterics, and your 'totalitarian' gibberish.

And of course, your comic, almost childishly imaginary version of Miranda in which investigators have to read Miranda rights to anyone they ask any question. Even if they're not in custody.

Um, Brit......no such requirements exist. Your imaginary version of Miranda doesn't exist. You've hallicinated all of it.

Man, you are such a Stalinist scumbag it's positively scary. We are well down the road to what the people in the Soviet Union went through in the 1920s. Do you actually believe FBI agents should be allowed to show up at your door claiming it's just a social visit, and then treat everything you say as if you are under oath?

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

The so-called "federal investigators" didn't make it known they were investigating anything, douchebag.

Laughing....there's no requirement that the FBI instruct someone that any false statements they make is a crime. Flynn agreed to be interviewed by the FBI. He lied to them. He commited a serious crime in the process.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

 

[Skylar]

Again, says the wasteland of your imagination. You're the same hapless soul that insisted that Michael Flynn's rights were violated because he wans't read his Miranda rights before he was asked a few questions.,....and while NOT in custody.

That's not how Miranda rights work, Brit. That's how your imagination works.

And again, the law says that willfully and knowingly making materially false, ficticious and fraudulent statements to federal investigators is a crime. Which Michael Flynn openly admits he did.

The only one saying that Michael Flynn didn't lie to investigators....is you citing your imagination. Which, as your blunders regarding the Miranda requirements demonstrate, is useless gibberish.

Being detained by the law is in custody .


.

And who, pray tell, claim that Flynn was 'detained'.

There's you, citing yourself. And....who else? Not Flynn. Not any judge. Not the prosecutors. Not Flynn's lawyers.

Just your imagination. Do you see why your imagination might not be terribly compelling in an actual court of law?

It's funny how you ***** and moan the law kills kneegrows yet defend the law when going against a ******* 1966 supreme Court ruling..


.

The problem with your logic is......the only one saying that Michael Flynn was detained is you. Citing your imagination. And your imagination doesn't establish a violation of a '******* 1966 supreme court ruling'.

It merely establishes whatever you choose to make up, based on nothing.

Can you see why your imagination doesn't amount to much as a legal argument?

Your the one trying to skirt supreme Court ruling not me...



Have you ever been arrested? It's obvious powder puff you have not..


.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Michael Flynn wasn't arrested. You've completely imagined that Flynn was 'detained'. In reality, Flynn agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators. Voluntarily. At his office.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

Who then, says Michael Flynn was detained by the FBI? There's you, citing your imagination and....who?

 

[talksalot]

Republicans once again show their contempt for the will of the people.

First to block the voters right to decide minimum wage, secondly by withdrawing their wage increase once the election was over and thirdly by preventing a popularly elected governor from enforcing the law

Those people are stupid to vote for anti American demoncraps.

Had nothing to do with Democrats
Had to do with the people of Michigan wanting to vote on a minimum wage increase

Republicans offered them an increase and then yanked it away as soon as the election was over

Poor democrats!

Poor voters

Good political move. Artificially inflating the minimum wage would have had a negative impact. The vote was never taken so we don't know if the will of the people was actually thwarted. If the voters were smart they would have voted against raising the minimum wage, but luckily, it's been put off for awhile.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Being detained by the law is in custody .


.

And who, pray tell, claim that Flynn was 'detained'.

There's you, citing yourself. And....who else? Not Flynn. Not any judge. Not the prosecutors. Not Flynn's lawyers.

Just your imagination. Do you see why your imagination might not be terribly compelling in an actual court of law?

It's funny how you ***** and moan the law kills kneegrows yet defend the law when going against a ******* 1966 supreme Court ruling..


.

The problem with your logic is......the only one saying that Michael Flynn was detained is you. Citing your imagination. And your imagination doesn't establish a violation of a '******* 1966 supreme court ruling'.

It merely establishes whatever you choose to make up, based on nothing.

Can you see why your imagination doesn't amount to much as a legal argument?

Your the one trying to skirt supreme Court ruling not me...



Have you ever been arrested? It's obvious powder puff you have not..


.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Michael Flynn wasn't arrested. You've completely imagined that Flynn was 'detained'. In reality, Flynn agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators. Voluntarily. At his office.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

Who then, says Michael Flynn was detained by the FBI? There's you, citing your imagination and....who?

And America's favorite lovers had their phone reset...why is that, it was a huge trick ..

It reminds me of the time I was detained by the cops and I let them look in my pack back on the ground and they threw down a pack of smokes filled with pot and asked if it was mine .


I told them what's that I could see pot was in it ..not mine. I hate weed..to bad it wasn't cocaine I would of picked it up and ran into the woods

 

[Skylar]

And who, pray tell, claim that Flynn was 'detained'.

There's you, citing yourself. And....who else? Not Flynn. Not any judge. Not the prosecutors. Not Flynn's lawyers.

Just your imagination. Do you see why your imagination might not be terribly compelling in an actual court of law?

It's funny how you ***** and moan the law kills kneegrows yet defend the law when going against a ******* 1966 supreme Court ruling..


.

The problem with your logic is......the only one saying that Michael Flynn was detained is you. Citing your imagination. And your imagination doesn't establish a violation of a '******* 1966 supreme court ruling'.

It merely establishes whatever you choose to make up, based on nothing.

Can you see why your imagination doesn't amount to much as a legal argument?

Your the one trying to skirt supreme Court ruling not me...



Have you ever been arrested? It's obvious powder puff you have not..


.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Michael Flynn wasn't arrested. You've completely imagined that Flynn was 'detained'. In reality, Flynn agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators. Voluntarily. At his office.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

Who then, says Michael Flynn was detained by the FBI? There's you, citing your imagination and....who?

And America's favorite lovers had their phone reset...why is that, it was a huge trick ..

It reminds me of the time I was detained by the cops and I let them look in my pack back on the ground and they threw down a pack of smokes filled with pot and asked if it was mine .


I told them what's that I could see pot was in it ..not mine. I hate weed..to bad it wasn't cocaine I would of picked it up and ran into the woods

Yeah, and who says that Michael flyn was detained by the federal agents?

There's you citing your imagination....and who else?

 

[Wyatt earp]

It's funny how you ***** and moan the law kills kneegrows yet defend the law when going against a ******* 1966 supreme Court ruling..


.

The problem with your logic is......the only one saying that Michael Flynn was detained is you. Citing your imagination. And your imagination doesn't establish a violation of a '******* 1966 supreme court ruling'.

It merely establishes whatever you choose to make up, based on nothing.

Can you see why your imagination doesn't amount to much as a legal argument?

Your the one trying to skirt supreme Court ruling not me...



Have you ever been arrested? It's obvious powder puff you have not..


.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Michael Flynn wasn't arrested. You've completely imagined that Flynn was 'detained'. In reality, Flynn agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators. Voluntarily. At his office.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

Who then, says Michael Flynn was detained by the FBI? There's you, citing your imagination and....who?

And America's favorite lovers had their phone reset...why is that, it was a huge trick ..

It reminds me of the time I was detained by the cops and I let them look in my pack back on the ground and they threw down a pack of smokes filled with pot and asked if it was mine .


I told them what's that I could see pot was in it ..not mine. I hate weed..to bad it wasn't cocaine I would of picked it up and ran into the woods

Yeah, and who says that Michael flyn was detained by the federal agents?

There's you citing your imagination....and who else?

They tricked his ass and you know it .

He thought it was just going to be cool and not a set up, I can't count you the 100 of times I have been detained by cops...one thing we all know just be cool with them and they will let you go...



This was a huge set up to take away his 1966 Miranda rights and you know it


.

 

[Skylar]

The problem with your logic is......the only one saying that Michael Flynn was detained is you. Citing your imagination. And your imagination doesn't establish a violation of a '******* 1966 supreme court ruling'.

It merely establishes whatever you choose to make up, based on nothing.

Can you see why your imagination doesn't amount to much as a legal argument?

Your the one trying to skirt supreme Court ruling not me...



Have you ever been arrested? It's obvious powder puff you have not..


.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Michael Flynn wasn't arrested. You've completely imagined that Flynn was 'detained'. In reality, Flynn agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators. Voluntarily. At his office.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

Who then, says Michael Flynn was detained by the FBI? There's you, citing your imagination and....who?

And America's favorite lovers had their phone reset...why is that, it was a huge trick ..

It reminds me of the time I was detained by the cops and I let them look in my pack back on the ground and they threw down a pack of smokes filled with pot and asked if it was mine .


I told them what's that I could see pot was in it ..not mine. I hate weed..to bad it wasn't cocaine I would of picked it up and ran into the woods

Yeah, and who says that Michael flyn was detained by the federal agents?

There's you citing your imagination....and who else?

They tricked his ass and you know it .

And by 'tricking his ass', you mean they asked him questions....exactly like they told him they were going to do?

Again, who says Michael Flynn was detained? This is the beating heart of your entire argument about the '1966 Supreme Court ruling', and yet you've completely abandoned it.

If even you won't stand by the pseudo-legal horseshit you make up, what use would anyone else have for it?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Your the one trying to skirt supreme Court ruling not me...



Have you ever been arrested? It's obvious powder puff you have not..


.

Says you, citing your imagination.

Michael Flynn wasn't arrested. You've completely imagined that Flynn was 'detained'. In reality, Flynn agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators. Voluntarily. At his office.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

Who then, says Michael Flynn was detained by the FBI? There's you, citing your imagination and....who?

And America's favorite lovers had their phone reset...why is that, it was a huge trick ..

It reminds me of the time I was detained by the cops and I let them look in my pack back on the ground and they threw down a pack of smokes filled with pot and asked if it was mine .


I told them what's that I could see pot was in it ..not mine. I hate weed..to bad it wasn't cocaine I would of picked it up and ran into the woods

Yeah, and who says that Michael flyn was detained by the federal agents?

There's you citing your imagination....and who else?

They tricked his ass and you know it .

And by 'tricking his ass', you mean they asked him questions....exactly like they told him they were going to do?

Again, who says Michael Flynn was detained? This is the beating heart of your entire argument about the '1966 Supreme Court ruling', and yet you've completely abandoned it.

If even you won't stand by the pseudo-legal horseshit you make up, what use would anyone else have for it?

Once the cops talk to you , you are being detained against your will .


Not that hard to comprehend ..


.

 

[Skylar]

Says you, citing your imagination.

Michael Flynn wasn't arrested. You've completely imagined that Flynn was 'detained'. In reality, Flynn agreed to be interviewed by federal investigators. Voluntarily. At his office.

Says who? Says Michael Flynn.

Who then, says Michael Flynn was detained by the FBI? There's you, citing your imagination and....who?

And America's favorite lovers had their phone reset...why is that, it was a huge trick ..

It reminds me of the time I was detained by the cops and I let them look in my pack back on the ground and they threw down a pack of smokes filled with pot and asked if it was mine .


I told them what's that I could see pot was in it ..not mine. I hate weed..to bad it wasn't cocaine I would of picked it up and ran into the woods

Yeah, and who says that Michael flyn was detained by the federal agents?

There's you citing your imagination....and who else?

They tricked his ass and you know it .

And by 'tricking his ass', you mean they asked him questions....exactly like they told him they were going to do?

Again, who says Michael Flynn was detained? This is the beating heart of your entire argument about the '1966 Supreme Court ruling', and yet you've completely abandoned it.

If even you won't stand by the pseudo-legal horseshit you make up, what use would anyone else have for it?

Once the cops talk to you , you are being detained against your will .

Says who? Not the courts. Not law. Not Miranda v. Arizona or any other supreme court ruling in 1966. The Miranda court was very clear on what they meant by custodial interrogation. And it wasn't merely being questioned.

Where, pray tell, did you get this load of pseudo-legal horseshit?

Let me guess.....your imagination again?

 

[Wyatt earp]

And America's favorite lovers had their phone reset...why is that, it was a huge trick ..

It reminds me of the time I was detained by the cops and I let them look in my pack back on the ground and they threw down a pack of smokes filled with pot and asked if it was mine .


I told them what's that I could see pot was in it ..not mine. I hate weed..to bad it wasn't cocaine I would of picked it up and ran into the woods

Yeah, and who says that Michael flyn was detained by the federal agents?

There's you citing your imagination....and who else?

They tricked his ass and you know it .

And by 'tricking his ass', you mean they asked him questions....exactly like they told him they were going to do?

Again, who says Michael Flynn was detained? This is the beating heart of your entire argument about the '1966 Supreme Court ruling', and yet you've completely abandoned it.

If even you won't stand by the pseudo-legal horseshit you make up, what use would anyone else have for it?

Once the cops talk to you , you are being detained against your will .

Says who? Not the courts. Not law. Not Miranda v. Arizona or any other supreme court ruling in 1966. The Miranda court was very clear on what they meant by custodial interrogation. And it wasn't merely being questioned.

Where, pray tell, did you get this load of pseudo-legal horseshit?

Let me guess.....your imagination again?

Liar I know what you are trying to do California vs Pysock..


.