Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
I think you meant "prosecute?" Those two words are not interchangeable.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
I think you meant "prosecute?" Those two words are not interchangeable.
Since you both get that I wrote the wrong word and "prosecute" is it. Do you understand it now?
Words matter. Words matter.
I know, I know, but you both knew what I meant, I didn't proof read, bad habit...
I don't make assumptions. Otherwise I would assume you knew you can only be charged under the criminal code.
You said "I think you meant prosecute". That is assuming...
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
I knew what you meant. An odd thing to keep going back and forth on, I agree.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I have a suggestion. guess what it is.
I agree with you so not sure why you're getting snarky?
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Why would they not back this? The language used in the bill they say...
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said he disagreed with the description of the Capitol and worried that the “insurrection” label could be used by prosecutors.
If this gets used politically, the wording in the bill, then we really are in bad shape.
Politically is on the other end of the spectrum from "prosecutors". I don't understand what you mean.
I shortcut when I write instead of explaining it all sometimes...
The reasoning for some NOT to back it was because of the language used in the bill.
I find it preposterous to look at the bill that way.
If, and only if the language in this bill gets used down the road to legally persecute people, we as a country are in really bad shape.
It boils down to if you make a bill to honor people then cherry pick statements from it to use in court cases to me, is bad.
I do take time to hear the counterpoints and put them in reason.
this bill is simply to award a congressional gold medal to captial police on duty that day.
Correct but 12 people whom voted for it do not.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
I'm not convinced that your use of the word "persecute" in the context that you used it was accidental or due to a lack of proof reading. Very Fucker Carlson of you. Whereas in Mickey's context, it could be chalked up to misspelling.
Words matter. Words matter.
The quote I used says "prosecutors". The word was quoted even. I just messed up the word. Even if I had meant to use "persecute" what does it matter?
Guess you missed the question mark in my reply? What does it matter? Good god there's not enough patience in a lifetime to explain the difference between "persecute" and "prosecute" in the context that you used the word "persecute." Sure am glad you cleared that up.
I don't understand what you are trying to get at, I really don't...
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
You then asked, depending on which word was used, “what difference does it make?” and tried to equate that to a misspelled word. The difference, if you really don’t know, is quite large and substantial in their meaning and consequences, particularly in the context of your original post. The events of January 6th are not a laughing matter, nor one to be so easily misrepresented or glib about. January 6th wasn’t the end but the beginning.
I said you were right. I misspelled the word. I admitted to the above. I know the difference. Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
No, I’m making my point AFTER you claimed “not to understand what I was getting at.” Do yourself a favor and proof read your posts if you don’t want to be misunderstood. Really.
Have a great day!
Tool
Stinkfist
message to harry manback
Haha. I think that's part of their trilogy..
Message > prison sex> stinkfist
There is a Harry Manback Pt2. Also, if you didn't know Harry Manback is a homage to Bill Hicks and his skit "Hairy Bobbin' Man Ass".
Again w the language in the bill and it could be used as a "bearing on their case".
What a fucking kop out. You vote against the bill to "Back the Blue" because you're worried that a bill will unfairly prejudice a jury against a criminal defendant? Just curious, would you have voted no on this bill?
Again w the language in the bill and it could be used as a "bearing on their case".
What a fucking kop out. You vote against the bill to "Back the Blue" because you're worried that a bill will unfairly prejudice a jury against a criminal defendant? Just curious, would you have voted no on this bill?
I get that the "language matters" but it was an insurrection so I'd have voted Yes.
Comments
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-video-shows-brutal-beating-d-c-metropolitan-police-officer-n1267210
And you were right.
Capitol? I know what you meant but everyone says "words matter".
Words matter. Words matter.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I have a suggestion. guess what it is.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I understand the difference of the words. I wrote the wrong one and you and another picked up on it and both admitted I was wrong yet we are still going around with this?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I misspelled the word.
I admitted to the above.
I know the difference.
Nobody is laughing.
Move on.
You just argue to the point of arguing.
Have a great day!
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
message to harry manback
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Message > prison sex> stinkfist
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
It's weird to say the least, how quiet LEO defenders are about the GOP trying to memory hole 1/6.
Or to prove it was the FBI...
Or to prove Ashley Babbit was assasinated...
That case?
Yes that case. Interesting, huh?