Lt. Col. Lakin Court Martial

NigelTufnel said:
I was not wrong on anything. First, as Lorax has made abundantly clear to you, my original statement was about presidents. Second, no one disputed where or when McCain was born, just whether he is a natural born citizen. You don't need to see McCain's birth certificate to answer that question.
Click to expand...

wow...why would you lie when your words are quoted above

you flat out said no other candidate besides obama had their b/c requested

i showed you that at least one person requested mccain's...and you're not wrong? how are you not lying now?
 
Yurt said:
i'm talking about the left on this board you nitwit....nigel twice was wrong about mccain's b/c being requested, yet you don't call him out....

you're claim you're nonpartisan, but you're not....and its freakin hilarious that you would claim that status

the very fact you called me a birther and now i'm a mere apologist proves you're a liar....i wonder if you have the balls to admit it

tff, thanks for another day of proving your lies :)
Click to expand...

:)
 
Yurt said:
wow...why would you lie when your words are quoted above

you flat out said no other candidate besides obama had their b/c requested

i showed you that at least one person requested mccain's...and you're not wrong? how are you not lying now?
Click to expand...


You're an idiot. Post the entirety of the quote. If I recall correctly, I said that no other candidate was asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to be president. And that's 100% true.
 
Damocles said:
The auto-appeal process gives him a second trial with a different jury if the sentence is longer than 12 months. "They" are the military. I'll explain more when I have time to make the post I promised about my thoughts on this which you are sardonically having trouble waiting for...
Click to expand...


I question whether there is a right to a second trial, but I don't really give a shit. And I am eagerly anticipating your tinfoil hat theories. They ought to be good.
 
NigelTufnel said:
I question whether there is a right to a second trial, but I don't really give a shit. And I am eagerly anticipating your tinfoil hat theories. They ought to be good.
Click to expand...
You are likely to be one of the "surprised" I was speaking about earlier. I've been letting this formulate in my head for a bit. I wasn't willing to jump on either side of this one. While I thought it was important we discuss it, I had yet to firmly come to a conclusion of my own about what Lakin was doing, whether it was the right thing to do, or what could come of it. I really do think you'll be surprised as to what I actually think. But I won't be writing it for you... I just hope you are one who will read what I will write.

You can question what you want, but I took the word of the General on the radio who spoke about what would happen. If he got 12 or more months there is an auto-appeal that takes effect and there would be another trial, different JA, and new jury...
 
NigelTufnel said:
You're an idiot. Post the entirety of the quote. If I recall correctly, I said that no other candidate was asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to be president. And that's 100% true.
Click to expand...

good lord nigel...this guy went to court to prove mccain was not eligible and in doing so he:

One person who disagrees with that premise is New Hampshire resident Fred Hollander, who has filed a suit in U.S. District Court claiming that the Republican candidate is "not a natural born citizen." In an attempt to prove his argument, the 49-year-old computer programmer filed a subpoena last month seeking McCain's birth certificate
Click to expand...

i can't wait to see your spin on this, i've give you this link multiple times, its amazing how strong your denial is....i have no idea why you so desperately want to make the issue something its not, its bizarre
 
Yurt said:
good lord nigel...this guy went to court to prove mccain was not eligible and in doing so he:



i can't wait to see your spin on this, i've give you this link multiple times, its amazing how strong your denial is....i have no idea why you so desperately want to make the issue something its not, its bizarre
Click to expand...


I've already explained to you why the "questions" regarding Obama's eligibility and McCain's eligibility are not the same. You want to pretend they are for some odd reason.
 
NigelTufnel said:
I've already explained to you why the "questions" regarding Obama's eligibility and McCain's eligibility are not the same. You want to pretend they are for some odd reason.
Click to expand...

now you're outright lying...you said no other candidate was asked for his b/c to prove eligibility and then i showed you were wrong and then you said you were wrong on nothing...

why can't you admit that?

both issues are about eligibility, period. you are the one pretending they are different, they aren't.
 
Yurt said:
now you're outright lying...you said no other candidate was asked for his b/c to prove eligibility and then i showed you were wrong and then you said you were wrong on nothing...

why can't you admit that?

both issues are about eligibility, period. you are the one pretending they are different, they aren't.
Click to expand...


John McCain's birth certificate had nothing to do with proving his eligibility because no one disputed anything about his birth certificate. The issue for McCain is whether being born in the Panama Canal Zone makes a person a "natural born citizen." Again, that is purely a question of law. For Obama, the issue was whether he was really born in Hawaii or some place else. That is purely a question of fact. You ought to know the difference between the two.
 
NigelTufnel said:
John McCain's birth certificate had nothing to do with proving his eligibility because no one disputed anything about his birth certificate. The issue for McCain is whether being born in the Panama Canal Zone makes a person a "natural born citizen." Again, that is purely a question of law. For Obama, the issue was whether he was really born in Hawaii or some place else. That is purely a question of fact. You ought to know the difference between the two.
Click to expand...

whatever nigel, you're being flat out dishonest

the issue about "natural born citizen" is also the issue with obama and for mccain it was about his eligibility, i can't believe you would willingly lie and claim that guy brought the suit and it wasn't about mccain's eligibility when the article and the guy made it crystal clear it was

as its clear you're going to continue this bullshit and not admit you're wrong, piss off jackass
 
here is the case nigel would have you believe is not about mccain's eligibility:

Plaintiff brings this action( 1) to remedyh is disenfranchisemendtu ring the New
Hampshire primary election for the Republican nomination of their candidate for president in the
2008 election;a nd (2) to preventt he disenfranchisemenotf him and an estimated1 00m illion
additional voters who may otherwise cast their vote in the 2008 national election for a candidate
who may later be declared ineligible to the Offrce of President

As alleged more fully below, McCain is not a natural born citizen and therefore not
eligible to the Office of Presidenta s prescribedb y Article II, Section1 of the United States
Constitution.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/mccain_hollander_041708.pdf

i mean seriously, why would you lie about something like that nigel?
 
Yurt said:
whatever nigel, you're being flat out dishonest

the issue about "natural born citizen" is also the issue with obama and for mccain it was about his eligibility, i can't believe you would willingly lie and claim that guy brought the suit and it wasn't about mccain's eligibility when the article and the guy made it crystal clear it was

as its clear you're going to continue this bullshit and not admit you're wrong, piss off jackass
Click to expand...


No, the issue with Obama was whether he was born in Hawaii. The issue with McCain was whether his undisputed Panamanian birth meant he was a "natural born citizen." Those issues are not the same. One is a question of fact (was Obama really born in Hawaii) while the other is a question of law (is a person born to American parents serving int he Panama Canal Zone in 1936 a "natural born citizen" under the Constitution).

And I point out again that I am not lying about anything, though you continually do so throughout this thread. There's a good reason I won't admit to being wrong: I'm not.
 
NigelTufnel said:
I never claimed the suit was not about McCain's eligibility. Perhaps you could quote me so that we can resolve this issue and ship you back to remedial reading
Click to expand...

oh really?

So, not only has no president been asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to serve in the Oval Office, but no candidate except Obama has been asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to be president, John McCain included
Click to expand...

care to confess yet or do you want to continue this public and embarrassing ass whoopin?
 
NigelTufnel said:
No, the issue with Obama was whether he was born in Hawaii. The issue with McCain was whether his undisputed Panamanian birth meant he was a "natural born citizen." Those issues are not the same. One is a question of fact (was Obama really born in Hawaii) while the other is a question of law (is a person born to American parents serving int he Panama Canal Zone in 1936 a "natural born citizen" under the Constitution).

And I point out again that I am not lying about anything, though you continually do so throughout this thread. There's a good reason I won't admit to being wrong: I'm not.
Click to expand...

lmao....

both issues contained these allegations:

1. not a natural born citizen
2. not eligible to serve as president because not natural born citizen

yep, not at all the same....do continue to look like a jackass nigel, its provides some humor on an otherwise gloomy day :)
 
Yurt said:
lmao....

both issues contained these allegations:

1. not a natural born citizen
2. not eligible to serve as president because not natural born citizen

yep, not at all the same....do continue to look like a jackass nigel, its provides some humor on an otherwise gloomy day :)
Click to expand...


Hilarious. Let me approach it with two questions: did anyone ever dispute that McCain was born in Panama? Did anyone ever dispute that Obama was born in Hawaii?
 
NigelTufnel said:
You need to go back to remedial reading. This is quickly moving from hilarious to embarrassing.
Click to expand...

really...let's see it again and why don't you explain how my reading comprehension is not understanding what you're saying:

So, not only has no president been asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to serve in the Oval Office, but no candidate except Obama has been asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to be president, John McCain included
Click to expand...

lets see it more closely:

no candidate (except obama) has been asked to release his birth certificate to prove his eligibility to be president, john mccain included
Click to expand...

i show you a case where the guy subpeoned mccain's birth certificate in order to prove he was NOT eligible to be president and you still (dishonestly now) claim that your statement above is true

really nigel...are you really going to continue this nonsense just so you don't have to admit you're wrong....go ahead and explain how my reading is wrong, i doubt you will, you'll likely just ad hom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top