House GOP Loses Ally As D.I.N.O. Traficant Convicted
C_S II
Thu Apr 11, 4:51 PM ET
By PAUL SINGER, Associated Press Writer
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=716&e=3&cid=514&u=/ap/20020411/ap_on_go_co/traficant_trial_105
CLEVELAND (AP) - Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., the blustery
congressman who insisted on defending himself against what he
called a government vendetta, was convicted Thursday of federal
corruption charges.
The nine-term Democrat was found guilty on all 10 charges he
faced, including racketeering, bribery and fraud.
After each count, the judge asked Traficant if he wanted the jurors to
restate their verdict.
"No," he replied softly, standing with his hands folded in front of
him.
The sentencing date was not immediately set. He faces up to 63
years in prison, but will probably receive a much shorter term
under federal guidelines. He could be fined hundreds of thousands
of dollars.
Traficant, 60, could (SHOULD) also be expelled from the House by his
colleagues, something that has happened only once since the Civil
War.
Among the charges against Traficant were filing false tax returns,
receiving gifts and free labor from businessmen for his political
help and taking cash kickbacks and free labor from staff.
"Goodbye, congressman," U.S. District Judge Lesley Wells said to
his empty chair.
Under U.S. House rules, a felony conviction involving a member of
Congress triggers an automatic investigation by the Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct.
Penalties could include expulsion, censure, reprimand, fines or
committee removal.
Traficant, who angered many Democrats by voting to elect Republican
Dennis Hastert as speaker, has already been stripped of a committee
assignment.
____________________________________________
Thank God and Greyhound, He's GONE !
" BEAM HIM UP "
C_S
The Frog
"C_S II" <cracked_...@bigmailbox.net> wrote in message
news:2f0cfeed.02041...@posting.google.com...
> D.I.N.O. Traficant Convicted of Corruption
> Thu Apr 11, 4:51 PM ET
>
> By PAUL SINGER, Associated Press Writer
>
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=716&e=3&cid=514&u=/ap/20020
411/ap_on_go_co/traficant_trial_105
>
> CLEVELAND (AP) - Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., the blustery
> congressman who insisted on defending himself against what he
> called a government vendetta, was convicted Thursday of federal
> corruption charges.
>
> The nine-term Democrat was found guilty on all 10 charges he
> faced, including racketeering, bribery and fraud.
OK, he's done........NEXT!!!!!
Tarver Engineering
"The Frog" <jm...@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:Iznt8.78309$2S.328...@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
It doen's look good for the criminal DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
Has anyone seen Terry?
John
Marcus S. Turner
Generally, you want to drop some ellipses where you have cut out text...
Smoked em out - and Left em Runnin
I can't post the whole article anyway, fair use prohibits it...but as far as
esthetics you are correct and I will [...] it next time.
C_S
" We're going to get him running and keep
him running and bring him to justice."
-- Crawford Texas, Dec. 28, 2001
" I truly am not that concerned about him."
-- White House Press Conference,
March 13, 2002
classicliberal2
<jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
> It doen's look good for the criminal
> DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
___
Me, from yesterday:
"What will be interesting will be to see the
reaction of the Republicans; the praise
they've heaped upon Traficant for years
reaches into the sky beyond the range of
human sight--will he suddenly become
'just another corrupt Democrat' if he is
convicted...?"
Doesn't engaging in this sort of
nonsensical spin make you feel silly?
bob
classicliberal2 wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:47:21 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
> <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>
> > It doen's look good for the criminal
> > DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
> ___
>
> Me, from yesterday:
>
> "What will be interesting will be to see the
> reaction of the Republicans; the praise
> they've heaped upon Traficant for years
> reaches into the sky beyond the range of
> human sight--will he suddenly become
> 'just another corrupt Democrat' if he is
> convicted...?"
They'll unanimously vote him out, of course. The side with the problem
is the Democrats, who have already established that perjury and
obstruction of justice isn't enough to remove one of their own. How
will they answer questions when asked how they could boot Trafficant and
coddle Clinton?
>
> Doesn't engaging in this sort of
> nonsensical spin make you feel silly?
You tell us.
Bob
Dusty Rhodes
news:3cb620d8$1...@news.sierratel.com...
Oh, I dunno. If the GOP top party officials keep getting busted, who'll be
left to do the lying, stealing and cheating necessary for the GOP to win?
Example:
Virginia G.O.P. Director Accused of Wiretapping
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
ICHMOND, Va., April 9 - The executive director of the Virginia Republican
Party was indicted today on four counts of breaking the state wiretapping
law by listening to Democrats discuss redistricting strategy.
You can find a link to the full story on my blog:
http://radio.weblogs.com/0105714/2002/04/10.html#a181
Cheers,
Dusty
--
Check out my Weblog, 'Everything...Possible...Happens.,' for news and views
from more than 2000 different news feeds updated hourly.
http://radio.weblogs.com/0105714/
D.G. Porter
>
> They'll unanimously vote him out, of course. The side with the problem
> is the Democrats, who have already established that perjury and
> obstruction of justice isn't enough to remove one of their own. How
> will they answer questions when asked how they could boot Trafficant and
> coddle Clinton?
The facts never get in the way of a rightwinger.
How convenient to forget the Repubs who voted "Not guilty."
Perjury must be relevant to the case to be perjury.
Obstruction of justice was never proven because it never happened.
But never mind that, bob just has his need to hate Clinton.
After all, Clinton was a slappinna face to Reaganism.
So Clinton is forever evil because Reagan is god.
You better hope Bush never gets investigated to the tune of $73 million.
Tarver Engineering
"classicliberal2" <classic...@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:828038B12A0598D2.5F60C693...@lp.airnews.net...
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:47:21 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
> <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>
> > It doen's look good for the criminal
> > DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
> ___
>
> Me, from yesterday:
>
> "What will be interesting will be to see the
> reaction of the Republicans; the praise
> they've heaped upon Traficant for years
> reaches into the sky beyond the range of
> human sight--will he suddenly become
> 'just another corrupt Democrat' if he is
> convicted...?"
Trafficant is just another corrupt Democrat.
Tarver Engineering
"Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
news:6Oot8.41884$wt5.1...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> "Tarver Engineering" <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote in message
> news:3cb620d8$1...@news.sierratel.com...
> >
> > "The Frog" <jm...@ticnet.com> wrote in message
> > news:Iznt8.78309$2S.328...@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> > >
> > > "C_S II" <cracked_...@bigmailbox.net> wrote in message
> > > news:2f0cfeed.02041...@posting.google.com...
> > > > D.I.N.O. Traficant Convicted of Corruption
> > > > Thu Apr 11, 4:51 PM ET
> > > >
> > > > By PAUL SINGER, Associated Press Writer
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=716&e=3&cid=514&u=/ap/20020
> > > 411/ap_on_go_co/traficant_trial_105
> > > >
> > > > CLEVELAND (AP) - Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., the blustery
> > > > congressman who insisted on defending himself against what he
> > > > called a government vendetta, was convicted Thursday of federal
> > > > corruption charges.
> > > >
> > > > The nine-term Democrat was found guilty on all 10 charges he
> > > > faced, including racketeering, bribery and fraud.
> > >
> > > OK, he's done........NEXT!!!!!
> >
> > It doen's look good for the criminal DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
>
> Oh, I dunno. If the GOP top party officials keep getting busted,
Has anyone seen the insider trader DNC chair?
John
righ...@scumbag.com
>It doen's look good for the criminal DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
How in fuck can that hurt, Tarverloon?
Trafficant didn't vote democratic.
====================================================
Poor, pathetic, DIMWIT DANA, blusterers thusly:
IT PROVES YOU ARE A HYPOCRITE.
Hey ASSHOLE no one but you cares about this,
but it does show you are a hypocritical LOON.
Come on Roseasshole tell us what town you live in,
or are you to chicken to fight.
I am in Phoenix, and my number is listed,
come on chicken man, make your hat.
Tarver Engineering
<righ...@scumbag.com> wrote in message
news:3cb62a32....@news.enetis.net...
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:47:21 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
> <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote like a right wing nut;
>
> >It doen's look good for the criminal DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
>
> How in fuck can that hurt, Tarverloon?
Trafficant is another example of Democratic criminal activity; just like
McAuliffe.
A few more of these Democratic convictions will play well in November.
John
classicliberal2
>> It doen's look good for the criminal DNC
>> retaking Congress in 2002.
>
> How in fuck can that hurt, Tarverloon?
>
> Trafficant didn't vote democratic.
___
If he's replaced by a real Democrat,
that's good news for the Democrats;
if he's replaced by a Republican,
nothing changes; his conviction and
possible expulsion, however, is a
blow to Republicans, no matter how
anyone may want to spin it. In any
case, the Republicans are hurt, and
the Democrats aren't, and the latter
may be helped by this situation. If
you're keeping score, that's how it
all totals up.
Dusty Rhodes
Have you seen THIS?:
Virginia G.O.P. Director Accused of Wiretapping. The executive director of
the Virginia Republican Party was indicted on four counts of breaking the
state wiretapping law. By The New York Times. [New York Times: National]
From the "Hypocrisy Gene In Action" file, we told you about this latest
fetid GOP dirty trick a few days ago. Today a grand jury indicted the lying
rat bastard Virginia GOP boss on 4 counts of wiretapping.
His hired weasel's attempt to have the charges dismissed was laughed out of
court. The weasel tried to claim the charges were politically motivated,
though the truth is the investigation was begun by a GOP attorney general.
Is there no lie the GOP won't try?
Anonymous
wrote::
::They'll unanimously vote him out, of course. The side with the problem
::is the Democrats, who have already established that perjury and
::obstruction of justice isn't enough to remove one of their own. How
::will they answer questions when asked how they could boot Trafficant and
::coddle Clinton?
Oh, get out of here. There are plenty of Republican cases. What
happens is that the leadership leans on them to leave quietly to
maintain the fiction that the GOP is honest.
Tarver Engineering
"Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
Not like he is the DNC chair.
Terry belongs in prison, as he did for his deeds with Milken.
John
Foxtrot
>D.I.N.O. Traficant Convicted of Corruption
>
>CLEVELAND (AP) - Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., the blustery
>congressman who insisted on defending himself against what he
>called a government vendetta, was convicted Thursday of federal
>corruption charges.
>
>The nine-term Democrat ...
Eh? What's that you say? What party did you say he's from?
Oh yeah, he's a DEMOCRAT!!!! LOL
> ... was found guilty on all 10 charges he
>faced, including racketeering, bribery and fraud.
Yessir, he sure sounds like a Dem.
Traficant has the tallest head I believe I've ever seen. Take
look at this photo:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,50105,00.html
His eyes are actually in the center of his head. He looks like
he's wearing a Pope hat!
>Traficant, 60, could (SHOULD) also be expelled from the House by his
>colleagues, something that has happened only once since the Civil
>War.
He should be expelled, eh Crackpot? Do you think Democrat
Alcee Hastings, who as a judge, was impeached and thrown
off the bench, only to return as a US Representative, is fit for
office?
Tarver Engineering
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 00:28:46 GMT, righ...@scumbag.com wrote:
>
> >> It doen's look good for the criminal DNC
> >> retaking Congress in 2002.
> >
> > How in fuck can that hurt, Tarverloon?
> >
> > Trafficant didn't vote democratic.
> ___
>
> If he's replaced by a real Democrat,
> that's good news for the Democrats;
> if he's replaced by a Republican,
> nothing changes; his conviction and
> possible expulsion, however, is a
> blow to Republicans, no matter how
> anyone may want to spin it.
Funny how gaining a seat in the House can be spun as a defeat for
Republicans.
You must have gotten into some bad dope.
John
Dusty Rhodes
Please provide a citation to THAT indictment, goof.
Dusty Rhodes
news:iehcbu85c2j43p7ad...@4ax.com...
> cracked_...@bigmailbox.net (C_S II) wrote:
>
> >D.I.N.O. Traficant Convicted of Corruption
>
>
>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=716&e=3&cid=514&u=/ap/2002
0411/ap_on_go_co/traficant_trial_105
> >
> >CLEVELAND (AP) - Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., the blustery
> >congressman who insisted on defending himself against what he
> >called a government vendetta, was convicted Thursday of federal
> >corruption charges.
> >
> >The nine-term Democrat ...
>
> Eh? What's that you say? What party did you say he's from?
>
> Oh yeah, he's a DEMOCRAT!!!! LOL
That almost always voted with REPUBLICANS!!!!
IOW, the GOP loses yet another reliable vote. LOL, indeed.
Natty Bumppo
Shades of the Clinton administration!!When a demoncrat gets
busted,blame it on the GOP!!Ain't nuthin' changed!!
classicliberal2
<jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>>>> It doen's look good for the criminal DNC
>>>> retaking Congress in 2002.
>>>
>>> How in fuck can that hurt, Tarverloon?
>>>
>>> Trafficant didn't vote democratic.
>>
>> If he's replaced by a real Democrat,
>> that's good news for the Democrats;
>> if he's replaced by a Republican,
>> nothing changes; his conviction and
>> possible expulsion, however, is a
>> blow to Republicans, no matter how
>> anyone may want to spin it.
>
> Funny how gaining a seat in the House
> can be spun as a defeat for Republicans.
___
They've lost a seat in the House today;
the best they can hope for is to gain it
back.
Foxtrot
>"Foxtrot" <fox...@null.com> wrote
>> cracked_...@bigmailbox.net (C_S II) wrote:
>> >http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=716&e=3&cid=514&u=/ap/20020411/ap_on_go_co/traficant_trial_105
>> >
>> >CLEVELAND (AP) - Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., the blustery
>> >congressman who insisted on defending himself against what he
>> >called a government vendetta, was convicted Thursday of federal
>> >corruption charges.
>> >
>> >The nine-term Democrat ...
>>
>> Eh? What's that you say? What party did you say he's from?
>>
>> Oh yeah, he's a DEMOCRAT!!!! LOL
>
>That almost always voted with REPUBLICANS!!!!
>
>IOW, the GOP loses yet another reliable vote. LOL, indeed.
How could he be seen as a reliable GOP vote if he voted
not to impeach Clinton, Rhodekill?
That was the single most important historic vote in the House
in decades, and he went along with Dems. You can't tag him
as a Republican just because he voted with them on obscure
stuff like farm bills.
classicliberal2
> Yessir, he sure sounds like a Dem.
___
Funny how Repubs thought he sounded
like one of him until right up to the second
the words "guilty" were read.
C_S II
http://balderdashe.com/usapol/archives/vol1/V1-32.html
C_S
cracked_...@bigmailbox.net (C_S II) wrote in message news:<2f0cfeed.02041...@posting.google.com>...
mrcid
> look at this photo:
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,50105,00.html
>
> His eyes are actually in the center of his head. He looks like
> he's wearing a Pope hat!
He reminds me of a cartoon character...... of which the name escapes me
right now.
mrcid.
mrcid
>
> How could he be seen as a reliable GOP vote if he voted
> not to impeach Clinton, Rhodekill?
>
> That was the single most important historic vote in the House
> in decades, and he went along with Dems. You can't tag him
> as a Republican just because he voted with them on obscure
> stuff like farm bills.
It's the Dems feeble attempt to distance themselves from him now: Just label
him a republican and say we never really liked him anyhow.
mrcid
mhirtes
A KKKOnservative Democrat is no Democrat at all.
Just like Condit, the House is getting cleaned for new members in November.
Dusty Rhodes
--
Check out my Weblog, 'Everything...Possible...Happens.,' for news and views
from more than 2000 different news feeds updated hourly.
http://radio.weblogs.com/0105714/
"Foxtrot" <fox...@null.com> wrote in message
news:99kcbuobt631uvaem...@4ax.com...
> "Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote:
>
> >"Foxtrot" <fox...@null.com> wrote
> >> cracked_...@bigmailbox.net (C_S II) wrote:
> >>
>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=716&e=3&cid=514&u=/ap/2002
0411/ap_on_go_co/traficant_trial_105
> >> >
> >> >CLEVELAND (AP) - Rep. James A. Traficant Jr., the blustery
> >> >congressman who insisted on defending himself against what he
> >> >called a government vendetta, was convicted Thursday of federal
> >> >corruption charges.
> >> >
> >> >The nine-term Democrat ...
> >>
> >> Eh? What's that you say? What party did you say he's from?
> >>
> >> Oh yeah, he's a DEMOCRAT!!!! LOL
> >
> >That almost always voted with REPUBLICANS!!!!
> >
> >IOW, the GOP loses yet another reliable vote. LOL, indeed.
>
> How could he be seen as a reliable GOP vote if he voted
> not to impeach Clinton, Rhodekill?
I give up, how? And, while you're at it, what about the Republicans who
voted to acquit?
See, dumb fuck, not everyone, not even all Republicans, share you bizarre
obsession with Bill Clinton.
> That was the single most important historic vote in the House
> in decades, and he went along with Dems.
BWA HA HA HA HA HA, whew, BWA HA HA HA HA, you stupid fuck! You LOST that
vote, dumbshit.
> You can't tag him
> as a Republican just because he voted with them on obscure
> stuff like farm bills.
And pretty much everything else that came down the pike. Nice squirming,
there, weasel.
Cheers,
Dusty
Dusty Rhodes
news:3cb658f3$0$322$45be...@newscene.com...
Label? Take a look at this voting record, genius.
classicliberal2
>> How could he be seen as a reliable GOP
>> vote if he voted not to impeach Clinton,
>> Rhodekill?
>>
>> That was the single most important historic
>> vote in the House in decades, and he went
>> along with Dems. You can't tag him as a
>> Republican just because he voted with
>> them on obscure stuff like farm bills.
>
> It's the Dems feeble attempt to distance
> themselves from him now: Just label
> him a republican and say we never
> really liked him anyhow.
___
The Dems don't have to make any
"feeble attempt to distance themselves
from him now"--they did that years ago.
From backing primary challengers to
denying Traficant committee asignments,
they are on the record loud and clear, on
that count. And, actually relevant to this
thread, there are some other folks on the
record about James Traficant:
From right-wing columnist Doug
Bandow, July 12, 2000:
"Earlier this year, Rep. James Traficant,
D-Ohio, whose honesty as well as stability
is in some doubt, suffered a primary
challenge, which he blames on his party's
leadership. So, at the end of June, the
Republicans shoveled $25 million for a
new community center in Youngstown,
Ohio, Traficant's hometown, into
'emergency' legislation covering Colombia,
Kosovo and domestic disaster relief.
"Explained House Speaker J. Dennis
Hastert, R-Ill.: 'We always try to help
our friends.'
"Traficant returned the love. As the bill
moved toward passage, he complimented
the GOP in a speech on the House floor.
He later declared that Hastert is 'a good
man, and I'm going to vote for him for
speaker, and I don't give a damn who
knows it.'"
From Paul Weyrich, Free Congress
Foundation, July 17, 2000:
"In a city filled with hypocrites and
phonies and plastic people, Jim Traficant
is a breath of fresh air... Whatever his
past sins, if Bill Clinton can be forgiven for
what he has done to America, then Jim
Traficant ought to be given a pass for
whatever it is he supposedly did. We
need his honesty and forthrightness in the
Congress."
From right-wing columnist Robert
Novak, Sept. 2, 2000:
"Maverick Democrat
"Rep. James Traficant of Ohio has further
antagonized his colleagues in the House
Democratic Caucus by going to Arkansas
to campaign for a vulnerable incumbent
Republican congressman, Rep. Jay Dickey.
"Traficant's position is that he considers
Dickey a friend whose party affiliation is
irrelevant. But Rep. Tom Davis, the
Republican House campaign chairman, told
this column he 'would not be surprised' if
Traficant publicly supports more Republican
candidates before the election."
Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-OH), who was
quoted in the Los Angeles Times saying
this about Traficant (8/27/00):
"There isn't a finer man, there isn't a finer
member of Congress, there isn't a finer
human being."
Wes Vernon, Newsmax, March 29, 2002:
"The Maverick Traficant
"Rep. Jim Traficant, the maverick Ohio
DINO (Democrat in name only), is praising
the Republicans for 'getting rid of a lot of
bureaucrats' and boasting that he voted for
'more of the GOP Contract with America
than 90 percent of the Republicans.'
"The House Republicans liked Jim Traficant
(Rush Limbaugh’s favorite Democrat) even
before the House Democratic Caucus
blackballed him for voting against Richard
Gephardt as speaker. And the feeling seems
to be mutual."
Or, you can hear it from the horse's ...er,
mouth itself:
http://www.house.gov/traficant/speech.htm
Stupendous Man
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:47:21 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
> <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>
>> It doen's look good for the criminal
>> DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
>
> Me, from yesterday:
>
> "What will be interesting will be to see the
> reaction of the Republicans; the praise
> they've heaped upon Traficant for years
> reaches into the sky beyond the range of
> human sight--will he suddenly become
> 'just another corrupt Democrat' if he is
> convicted...?"
>
> nonsensical spin make you feel silly?
Man, Carville has really lost his ability to tell a believable lie, hasn't he?
Stupendous Man
http://reagan.webteamone.com/
Reagan Rocks!
Tarver Engineering
"Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
We will not lead McAuliffe away in chains until May.
John
Tarver Engineering
"mhirtes" <mhi...@radiks.net> wrote in message
news:3CB65A06...@radiks.net...
>
>
> Tarver Engineering wrote:
> >
> > <righ...@scumbag.com> wrote in message
> > news:3cb62a32....@news.enetis.net...
> > > On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:47:21 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
> > > <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote like a right wing nut;
> > >
> > > >It doen's look good for the criminal DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
> > >
> > > How in fuck can that hurt, Tarverloon?
> >
> > Trafficant is another example of Democratic criminal activity; just like
> > McAuliffe.
> >
> > A few more of these Democratic convictions will play well in November.
> >
> > John
>
> A KKKOnservative Democrat is no Democrat at all.
Has anyone seen Terry?
> Just like Condit, the House is getting cleaned for new members in
November.
Do you mean Davis' best friend?
John
Tarver Engineering
You are dreamin'.
John
Tarver Engineering
Same as that Democrat Condit scum bag.
John
Tarver Engineering
> On 11 Apr 2002 22:51:07 -0500, "mrcid" <mr...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >> How could he be seen as a reliable GOP
> >> vote if he voted not to impeach Clinton,
> >> Rhodekill?
> >>
> >> That was the single most important historic
> >> vote in the House in decades, and he went
> >> along with Dems. You can't tag him as a
> >> Republican just because he voted with
> >> them on obscure stuff like farm bills.
> >
> > It's the Dems feeble attempt to distance
> > themselves from him now: Just label
> > him a republican and say we never
> > really liked him anyhow.
> ___
>
> The Dems don't have to make any
> "feeble attempt to distance themselves
No, it will take a lot more than a feeble attempt.
Criminals of the DNC are all about.
John
Tarver Engineering
How is old Condit the murderer doing?
And Terry could be lead away in chains any day now.
John
Tarver Engineering
"Stupendous Man" <ro...@127.0.0.1> wrote in message news:B8DBE3D7.6A602%ro...@127.0.0.1...
Really really thin.Has anyone seen Terry?John
Dusty Rhodes
news:3cb6...@news.sierratel.com...
>
> "Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
> news:s8st8.42350$wt5.1...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > "Tarver Engineering" <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote in message
> > news:3cb6...@news.sierratel.com...
> > >
> > > "Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
> > > > Have you seen THIS?:
> > > >
> > > > Virginia G.O.P. Director Accused of Wiretapping. The executive
> director
> > of
> > > > the Virginia Republican Party was indicted on four counts of
breaking
> > the
> > > > state wiretapping law. By The New York Times. [New York Times:
> National]
> > >
> > > Not like he is the DNC chair.
> >
> > Please provide a citation to THAT indictment, goof.
>
> We will not lead McAuliffe away in chains until May.
Gee, that's a funny way to say, "I can't, 'cause I'm just fulla shit."
bob
Dusty Rhodes wrote:
> "mrcid" <mr...@home.com> wrote in message
>
> > It's the Dems feeble attempt to distance themselves from him now: Just
> label
> > him a republican and say we never really liked him anyhow.
>
> Label? Take a look at this voting record, genius.
He voted not to impeach Clinton. Perhaps he saw this coming. Yep, a Dem
through and through.
Bob
George Grapman
Jan.,2001.
--
To reply via e-mail please delete "NOSPAM" from address.
Bill
>
> It doen's look good for the criminal DNC retaking Congress in 2002.
Considering that Traficant voted for Hastert for Speaker, it seems to me
that replacing him will be, if anything, a help for the Democrats. If they
can elect a Democrat to succeed him, that's one vote closer to electing
Gephardt Speaker.
Tarver Engineering
"Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
> "Tarver Engineering" <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote in message
> news:3cb6...@news.sierratel.com...
> >
> > "Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
> > news:s8st8.42350$wt5.1...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > > "Tarver Engineering" <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3cb6...@news.sierratel.com...
> > > >
> > > > "Dusty Rhodes" <te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote in message
>
> > > > > Have you seen THIS?:
> > > > >
> > > > > Virginia G.O.P. Director Accused of Wiretapping. The executive
> > director
> > > of
> > > > > the Virginia Republican Party was indicted on four counts of
> breaking
> > > the
> > > > > state wiretapping law. By The New York Times. [New York Times:
> > National]
> > > >
> > > > Not like he is the DNC chair.
> > >
> > > Please provide a citation to THAT indictment, goof.
> >
> > We will not lead McAuliffe away in chains until May.
>
> Gee, that's a funny way to say, "I can't, 'cause I'm just fulla shit."
It will be so much sweeter, the closer to November Terry's imprisonment
occurs.
John
Tarver Engineering
"Bill" <bwil...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:wmCt8.42593$8E3.9...@news02.optonline.net...
You are living in a dream world.
John
Other Tom
Democrat congress critter involved in 'missing girl' is defeated... he's
not a "real" democrat...
Democrat mayor convicted on drug-money laundering... he's not a "real"
democrat...
Democrat former-congress critter charged with embezzling $10million... he's
not a "real" democrat...
Democrat congressman convicted of 10 counts.... he's not a "real"
democrat...
Democrat executive who's accused of misuse of power, shady deals, kickbacks,
pressuring government loans to business partners, and lying under oath BUT
is not convicted and signs GOP-sponsored bills, claims 'victory', Clinton's
a *real* Democrat...
Hell, if we had a descent investagatory system, half the DemocRATs in
Congress (and 3/4s in NJ and Philadelphia) would be "not "real"
Democrats....
Spin spin SpIn sPiN SPin spIN
Other Tom;
PS
"There is something about a Republican that you can only stand for just so
long. On the other hand, there's something about a Democrat that you can't
stand for quite that long." Will Rogers
Bill
How so? Traficant's district is solid "D", and it's pretty much certain
that his successor will vote with the Dems when it comes time to elect the
House leadership. Note that I'm not predicting the Dems *will* win control
of the House this year -- just that Traficant's exit will likely put them
one vote closer.
Tarver Engineering
See above.
John
classicliberal2
<te...@POTTEDMEATtexas.net> wrote:
>> We will not lead McAuliffe away in
>> chains until May.
>
> Gee, that's a funny way to say, "I can't,
> 'cause I'm just fulla shit."
___
Funny, if unoriginal--John has said it
that very way perhaps half a dozen
times to me in this thread so far.
Tarver Engineering
Terry is an important issue for the election in 2002.
Consider the reprobate Clinton, the murderer Condit, and the convicted felon
Trafficant along with the insider trader McAuliffe and we have a snapshot of
the true character of the Democratic Party. Thae Party of Satan; Daschle
even looks like a demon.
John
Smoked em out - and Left em Runnin
Consider the ASSKICKING Clinton (and classicliberal2) laid on
your short-bus riding ass, Johnny Engineer.
That explains your bitterness.
HAHAHAHAHAHA.
C_S
" We're going to get him running and keep
him running and bring him to justice."
-- Crawford Texas, Dec. 28, 2001
" I truly am not that concerned about him."
-- White House Press Conference,
March 13, 2002
Stupendous Man
...
> Perjury must be relevant to the case to be perjury.
This is, of course, a lie.
> Obstruction of justice was never proven because it never happened.
Another lie.
> But never mind that, bob just has his need to hate Clinton.
> After all, Clinton was a slappinna face to Reaganism.
How so? He campaigned on (if not actually delivering) lower taxes, smaller government and signed NAFTA and welfare reform.
Heck, he is better at following Reagan than Bush I was!
> So Clinton is forever evil because Reagan is god.
No, he's evil because he's evil.
> You better hope Bush never gets investigated to the tune of $73 million.
No problem, he doesn't have to lie about anything.
Stupendous Man—Enemy of Totalitarianism
Amendment X:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are
reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
classicliberal2
wrote:
>> Perjury must be relevant to the case
>> to be perjury.
>
> This is, of course, a lie.
___
Materiality is a central requirement of
the crime of perjury, whether you
concede this fact or not. I defy you
to find any reference to any penal
code of any state or of the United
States where this is not explicity
stated as being true.
Stupendous Man
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 23:29:41 -0400, Stupendous Man <ro...@127.0.0.1>
> wrote:
>
>>> Perjury must be relevant to the case
>>> to be perjury.
>>
>> This is, of course, a lie.
>
> Materiality is a central requirement of
> the crime of perjury,
> whether you
> concede this fact or not. I defy you
> to find any reference to any penal
> code of any state or of the United
> States where this is not explicity
> stated as being true.
Leave it to a loser liberal to insist that I find the negative if his assertion.
Stupendous Man—The price of freedom is small compared to the alternative!
An E-2C Hawkeye prepares to land aboard USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74):
http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/carriers/stennis/sten-flyhome.jpg
classicliberal2
wrote:
>>>> Perjury must be relevant to the case
>>>> to be perjury.
>>>
>>> This is, of course, a lie.
>>
>> Materiality is a central requirement of
>> the crime of perjury,
>
> No, it is not.
___
Now, I'm going to hurt you.
___
>> whether you
>> concede this fact or not. I defy you
>> to find any reference to any penal
>> code of any state or of the United
>> States where this is not explicity
>> stated as being true.
>
> Hey loser, it's your claim, you back it up.
>
> Leave it to a loser liberal to insist that I
> find the negative if his assertion.
___
I'm asking you to prove your assertion
that materiality if not a central requirement
of the crime of perjruy; it is explicitly
stated that it is in every perjury statutes in
this nation. I just asked you to find one
where it isn't.
Here's how the U.S. Code defines
perjury:
"Whoever having taken an oath before
a competent tribunal, officer, or person,
in any case in which a law of the United
States authorizes an oath to be
administered, that he will testify, declare,
depose, or certify truly, or that any written
testimony, declaration, deposition, or
certificate by him subscribed, is true,
willfully and contrary to such oath states
or subscribes any material matter which
he does not believe to be true; or in any
declaration, certificate, verification, or
statement under penalty of perjury as
permitted under section 1746 of title 28,
United States Code, willfully subscribes
as true any material matter which he does
not believe to be true; is guilty of perjury
and shall, except as otherwise expressly
provided by law, be fined under this title
or imprisoned not more than five years,
or both. This section is applicable
whether the statement or subscription is
made within or without the United States."
Washington D.C. defines it thusly:
"A person commits the offense of perjury
if:
"(1) Having taken an oath or affirmation
before a competent tribunal, officer,
or person, in a case in which the law
authorized such oath or affirmation to
be administered, that he or she will testify,
declare, depose, or certify truly, or that
any written testimony, declaration,
deposition, or certificate by that person
subscribed is true, wilfully and contrary
to an oath or affirmation states or
subscribes any material matter which he
or she does not believe to be true and
which in fact is not true; or
(2) As a notary public or other officer
authorized to take proof of certification,
wilfully certifies falsely that an instrument
was acknowledged by any party thereto
or wilfully certifies falsely as to another
material matter in an acknowledgement."
My home state of Georgia defines it
like this:
"A person to whom a lawful oath or
affirmation has been administered
commits the offense of perjury when,
in a judicial proceeding, he knowingly
and willfully makes a false statement
material to the issue or point in question."
Please note the materiality requirement
in every one of these--I could list them all
day long, and the result will be the same.
Now, I ask you again to provide any
example where materiality is not a
requirement of the crime of perjury or to
apologize for your lies.
Let's hear it.
Stupendous Man
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2002 23:07:02 -0400, Stupendous Man <ro...@127.0.0.1>
> wrote:
>
>>>>> Perjury must be relevant to the case
>>>>> to be perjury.
>>>>
>>>> This is, of course, a lie.
>>>
>>> Materiality is a central requirement of
>>> the crime of perjury,
>>
>> No, it is not.
>
> Now, I'm going to hurt you.
Stupendous Man—Annoying liberals on Usenet since 1987.
After inheriting an inflationary economy from Carter, the Reagan economic
programs reduced inflation from a high 10.3% in 1981 to 4.8% in 1989.
http://reagan.webteamone.com/ --THE Ronald Reagan site.
Tugboat Andy
> On 2002-04-14 12:20 AM, in article
> D71A28A83A64F9AB.D9916F14...@lp.airnews.net,
> "classicliberal2" <classic...@operamail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2002 23:07:02 -0400, Stupendous Man <ro...@127.0.0.1>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>>>> Perjury must be relevant to the case
> >>>>> to be perjury.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is, of course, a lie.
> >>>
> >>> Materiality is a central requirement of
> >>> the crime of perjury,
> >>
> >> No, it is not.
> >
> >
>
> Yeah, you and what army?
LOL, this is Stupendous Man's brilliant retort to classicliberal2's
post quoting the US Code, the Washington DC Code, and the Georgia
Code, clearly showing that materiality is a central requirement in all
three. Relevant quotations snipped of course.
Not that cl2's research should really have been necessary. At the time
of the Clinton impeachment, everyone and his dog was talking about the
materiality requirement, so it's hard to explain how Stupe could have
missed it.
classicliberal2
wrote:
>>>>>> Perjury must be relevant to the case
>>>>>> to be perjury.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is, of course, a lie.
>>>>
>>>> Materiality is a central requirement of
>>>> the crime of perjury,
>>>
>>> No, it is not.
>>
>> Now, I'm going to hurt you.
>
> Yeah, you and what army?
___
Empty yellow talk won't save you
from this, stupe:
Prove your assertion that materiality is
not a central requirement of the crime
of perjruy; it is explicitly stated that it is
in every perjury statute in this nation.
Apologize for your lies, or you may become
very famous for them.
Let's hear it.
--CL2 -- "Gutting right-wingers on Usenet
for longer than he cares to remember"