I think the whole thing was a ruse to 'legally' 'discover' what the FBI already knew: Huma was borrowing her husband's computer to email her boss.
Yeah, a ruse sexting a teenager. Sure.
Could have been a FBI agent posing as a teenager. Guess we'll never know if they don't press charges. Wonder why they haven't yet...
C'mon, conspiracy theories only exist for the benefit of the alt-right and neocons. Everybody knows this.
Like Trump and Putin, right?
Your going to see how real the Trump-Putin conspiracy is when you're watching indictments being handed down and people going to jail, as well as watching impeachment proceedings on CSPAN. But I know, you'll still blame Hillary and Obama.
I think the whole thing was a ruse to 'legally' 'discover' what the FBI already knew: Huma was borrowing her husband's computer to email her boss.
Yeah, a ruse sexting a teenager. Sure.
Dude. GFY. You might be the biggest idiot on this board. In fact, I'd love to meet you some time in Detroit. Let me know when you come to town.
Don't go getting yourself banned just because unsung doesn't have critical thinking skills. You can fight idiocy with facts, although I recommend lots of simple pictures and graphs so it can be easily absorbed.
Citing actual court precedent could be a lot for some people to digest, but may be necessary at times. For example: UNITED STATES v. GAGLIARDI Defendant-Appellant Frank Gagliardi appeals from his conviction on one count of attempting to entice a minor to engage in prohibited sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). He argues that § 2422(b) requires an actual minor victim and is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. In the instant case, the targets of Gagliardi's attempted enticement were not actual minors but adults posing as minors. We now join several other circuits in holding that 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) does not require that the enticement victim be an actual “individual who has not attained the age of 18 years” and is neither unconstitutionally vague nor overbroad. Because Gagliardi's other arguments challenging his conviction are without merit, we affirm the judgment of conviction.
But then again, maybe unsung thinks pedophilia laws are just another example of big government getting all up in your face with their arbitrary rules and forced morality.
I think the whole thing was a ruse to 'legally' 'discover' what the FBI already knew: Huma was borrowing her husband's computer to email her boss.
Yeah, a ruse sexting a teenager. Sure.
Dude. GFY. You might be the biggest idiot on this board. In fact, I'd love to meet you some time in Detroit. Let me know when you come to town.
Don't go getting yourself banned just because unsung doesn't have critical thinking skills. You can fight idiocy with facts, although I recommend lots of simple pictures and graphs so it can be easily absorbed.
Citing actual court precedent could be a lot for some people to digest, but may be necessary at times. For example: UNITED STATES v. GAGLIARDI Defendant-Appellant Frank Gagliardi appeals from his conviction on one count of attempting to entice a minor to engage in prohibited sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). He argues that § 2422(b) requires an actual minor victim and is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. In the instant case, the targets of Gagliardi's attempted enticement were not actual minors but adults posing as minors. We now join several other circuits in holding that 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) does not require that the enticement victim be an actual “individual who has not attained the age of 18 years” and is neither unconstitutionally vague nor overbroad. Because Gagliardi's other arguments challenging his conviction are without merit, we affirm the judgment of conviction.
But then again, maybe unsung thinks pedophilia laws are just another example of big government getting all up in your face with their arbitrary rules and forced morality.
I think the whole thing was a ruse to 'legally' 'discover' what the FBI already knew: Huma was borrowing her husband's computer to email her boss.
Yeah, a ruse sexting a teenager. Sure.
Dude. GFY. You might be the biggest idiot on this board. In fact, I'd love to meet you some time in Detroit. Let me know when you come to town.
Don't go getting yourself banned just because unsung doesn't have critical thinking skills. You can fight idiocy with facts, although I recommend lots of simple pictures and graphs so it can be easily absorbed.
Citing actual court precedent could be a lot for some people to digest, but may be necessary at times. For example: UNITED STATES v. GAGLIARDI Defendant-Appellant Frank Gagliardi appeals from his conviction on one count of attempting to entice a minor to engage in prohibited sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). He argues that § 2422(b) requires an actual minor victim and is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. In the instant case, the targets of Gagliardi's attempted enticement were not actual minors but adults posing as minors. We now join several other circuits in holding that 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) does not require that the enticement victim be an actual “individual who has not attained the age of 18 years” and is neither unconstitutionally vague nor overbroad. Because Gagliardi's other arguments challenging his conviction are without merit, we affirm the judgment of conviction.
But then again, maybe unsung thinks pedophilia laws are just another example of big government getting all up in your face with their arbitrary rules and forced morality.
The last Weiner debacle with Hillary clearly in the lead was the NFL equivalent of Atlanta calling 2 pass plays in a row while within FG range while up 28 - 3. The beginning of the end.
The last Weiner debacle with Hillary clearly in the lead was the NFL equivalent of Atlanta calling 2 pass plays in a row while within FG range while up 28 - 3. The beginning of the end.
mods pay no attention to the unveiled threats. its a libby gonna beat up a mean old conservative so no need to intervene or get alarmed about some ones safety. good job!
mods pay no attention to the unveiled threats. its a libby gonna beat up a mean old conservative so no need to intervene or get alarmed about some ones safety. good job!
No worries, I can handle myself lol. As much as we all sometimes disagree I am never going to threaten anyone here like that. I'd rather have a beer with someone.
But I'm still not going to that sh**hole Detroit!!!
most people that say they live in the "d" really live in sterling or dearborn heights. Me personally, EAST SIDE BRIDGEPORT proper; WARREN HARDING HIGH proper. and neva caught a bad one! meet ups are cool wit me.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
2003 - 6/18 - Chicago, IL
2006 - 5/22 - Auburn Hills, MI
2007 - 8/5 - Chicago, IL
2015 - 9/26 - New York, NY
2016 - 4/16 - Greenville, SC; 8/20 - Chicago, IL; 8/22 - Chicago, IL
2018 - 8/18 - Chicago, IL; 8/20 - Chicago, IL
livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=3045
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Citing actual court precedent could be a lot for some people to digest, but may be necessary at times. For example:
UNITED STATES v. GAGLIARDI
Defendant-Appellant Frank Gagliardi appeals from his conviction on one count of attempting to entice a minor to engage in prohibited sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). He argues that § 2422(b) requires an actual minor victim and is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. In the instant case, the targets of Gagliardi's attempted enticement were not actual minors but adults posing as minors. We now join several other circuits in holding that 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) does not require that the enticement victim be an actual “individual who has not attained the age of 18 years” and is neither unconstitutionally vague nor overbroad. Because Gagliardi's other arguments challenging his conviction are without merit, we affirm the judgment of conviction.
But then again, maybe unsung thinks pedophilia laws are just another example of big government getting all up in your face with their arbitrary rules and forced morality.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
But I'm still not going to that sh**hole Detroit!!!
Me personally, EAST SIDE BRIDGEPORT proper; WARREN HARDING HIGH proper. and neva caught a bad one! meet ups are cool wit me.