christiefan915
Catalyst
If you think usaliar is a real poster you're dumber than anybody suspected. Stop feeding the troll.
You Get What You Pay For!
- Thread starter Taichiliberal
- Start date
If you think usaliar is a real poster you're dumber than anybody suspected. Stop feeding the troll.
christiefan915
Catalyst
I guess its our own fault for "feeding them".....
Feeding the pigs keeps them coming back for more....
It was kinda fun at first but the novelty is wearing off....
Every post is the same thing over and over....same exact words in various order to give the impression of variety....
Maybe it is time to end the charade and stop "feeding the trolls"....
Thanks, I am sorry you feel that way, please do not respond to anymore of my posts and I will do that same with you.
Bye bye love!
Bye bye love!
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Bottom line is he screwed up, and when he was called on it he stopped.
Crashk
Unite or Die
Sec. 36.02. BRIBERY. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly offers, confers, or agrees to confer on another, or solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept from another:
(1) any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, or other exercise of discretion as a public servant, party official, or voter;
(2) any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, vote, recommendation, or other exercise of official discretion in a judicial or administrative proceeding;
(3) any benefit as consideration for a violation of a duty imposed by law on a public servant or party official; or
(4) any benefit that is a political contribution as defined by Title 15, Election Code, or that is an expenditure made and reported in accordance with Chapter 305, Government Code, if the benefit was offered, conferred, solicited, accepted, or agreed to pursuant to an express agreement to take or withhold a specific exercise of official discretion if such exercise of official discretion would not have been taken or withheld but for the benefit; notwithstanding any rule of evidence or jury instruction allowing factual inferences in the absence of certain evidence, direct evidence of the express agreement shall be required in any prosecution under this subdivision....
(e) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/pe/htm/pe.36.htm
I guess some pigs are more equal than others.
(1) any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, opinion, recommendation, vote, or other exercise of discretion as a public servant, party official, or voter;
(2) any benefit as consideration for the recipient's decision, vote, recommendation, or other exercise of official discretion in a judicial or administrative proceeding;
(3) any benefit as consideration for a violation of a duty imposed by law on a public servant or party official; or
(4) any benefit that is a political contribution as defined by Title 15, Election Code, or that is an expenditure made and reported in accordance with Chapter 305, Government Code, if the benefit was offered, conferred, solicited, accepted, or agreed to pursuant to an express agreement to take or withhold a specific exercise of official discretion if such exercise of official discretion would not have been taken or withheld but for the benefit; notwithstanding any rule of evidence or jury instruction allowing factual inferences in the absence of certain evidence, direct evidence of the express agreement shall be required in any prosecution under this subdivision....
(e) An offense under this section is a felony of the second degree.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/pe/htm/pe.36.htm
I guess some pigs are more equal than others.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Do you have any evidence that this is what transpired?
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Bravo, must have the last word folks, even when he's babbling or lying
http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showpost.php?p=760659&postcount=16 
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
And here we have another example of pure neocon idiocy, folks. Our intellectually impotent Bravo says there's NO problem in the Tobacco lobby having a member of Congress hand out bribes (err, checks) before votes on legislation regarding the tobacco industry.
That's right folks, corruption is no problem to right wingnut hypocrits like Bravo, so long as it's being done by the neocon GOP. But you'd hear them howl to the moon if Pelosi or Reed were caught doing the same thing.
Now Bravo's only joy is telling everyone that he's ignoring me...like a child covering his ears to get the last word in....if he were really not interested in what I have to say, he would just IA me and be done with it. Sometimes, Bravo is almost too fucking stupid for words. I don't know what's more pathetic...Bravo's babblings or the fools that support/agree with him.
Last edited:
<<<<<<<< SWEET >>>>> 
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Do you have any evidence that they were bribes, Libby?
Crashk
Unite or Die
Did you watch the video? Did you do some research to find out if it was true that he handed out bribery checks from the tobacco industry on the House floor? Yes it is true.
I know who Bohner and Republicons represent and it's not the American people. It's about time you realized it.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
It appears that your answer is "no".
Crashk
Unite or Die
It appears that your answer is "no".
Your response is confusing. Are you saying that you didn't watch the video, you didn't do any research to find out for yourself if it was true? If so why are you responding to this post?
With all the evidence that he did this do you still believe he didn't? Or do you just not care who he represents and how corrupt he is?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
I apologize. Sometimes I forget I am dealing with folks of limited intellectual capacity.
I watched the video. It appears that Boener continued a legal practice of handing out checks in the House chamber. There is no evidence that the checks were contingent on a certain vote, so your claim of bribe based on the video alone is unfounded.
With regards to research, it is not up to me to prove your assertion for you.
Crashk
Unite or Die
"One day last summer Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, chairman of the House Republican Conference, decided to play Santa Claus. … In any event, Mr. Boehner took it upon himself to begin handing out money from tobacco lobbyists to certain of his colleagues on the House floor.
Boehner stopped handing out the checks only “after being questioned about the practice by two freshmen who’d heard about the handoff on the House floor”
Ok this didn't happen. Faux didn't cover it so it's a fantasy dreamed up by socialist members of the Democratic party. If that's what you want to believe then put your hands back over your ears like one of the wise monkeys.
Illegal? probably not but not very smart to distribute bribes on the house floor.
Boehner stopped handing out the checks only “after being questioned about the practice by two freshmen who’d heard about the handoff on the House floor”
Ok this didn't happen. Faux didn't cover it so it's a fantasy dreamed up by socialist members of the Democratic party. If that's what you want to believe then put your hands back over your ears like one of the wise monkeys.
Illegal? probably not but not very smart to distribute bribes on the house floor.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Again, the practice is legal. You have no evidence to assert that these were bribes.