info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct Justice
13 views
Skip to first unread message
Michael Ejercito
Jun 8, 2017, 1:38:00 PM6/8/17
to
History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
Justice
by Alan M. Dershowitz
June 8, 2017 at 9:15 am
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10497/trump-comey-obstruction-justice
The statement may provide political ammunition to Trump opponents, but
unless they are willing to stretch James Comey's words and take Trump's out
of context, and unless they are prepared to abandon important constitutional
principles and civil liberties that protect us all, they should not be
searching for ways to expand already elastic criminal statutes and shrink
enduring constitutional safeguards in a dangerous and futile effort to
criminalize political disagreements.
The first casualty of partisan efforts to "get" a political opponent —
whether Republicans going after Clinton or Democrats going after Trump — is
often civil liberties. All Americans who care about the Constitution and
civil liberties must join together to protest efforts to expand existing
criminal law to get political opponents.
Today it is Trump. Yesterday it was Clinton. Tomorrow it could be you.
In 1992, then President George Walker Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger and
five other individuals who had been indicted or convicted in connection with
the Iran-Contra arms deal. The special prosecutor, Lawrence Walsh, was
furious, accusing Bush of stifling his ongoing investigation and suggesting
that he may have done it to prevent Weinberger or the others from pointing
the finger of blame at Bush himself. The New York Times also reported that
the investigation might have pointed to Bush himself.
This is what Walsh said:
"The Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has
now been completed with the pardon of Caspar Weinberger. We will make a full
report on our findings to Congress and the public describing the details and
extent of this cover-up."
Yet President Bush was neither charged with obstruction of justice nor
impeached. Nor have other presidents who interfered with ongoing
investigations or prosecutions been charged with obstruction.
It is true that among the impeachment charges levelled against President
Nixon was one for obstructing justice, but Nixon committed the independent
crime of instructing his aides to lie to the FBI, which is a violation of
section 1001 of the federal criminal code.
It is against the background of this history and precedent that the
statement of former FBI Director James must be considered. Comey himself
acknowledged that,
"throughout history, some presidents have decided that because 'problems'
come from Justice, they should try to hold the Department close. But
blurring those boundaries ultimately makes the problems worse by undermining
public trust in the institutions and their work."
Comey has also acknowledged that the president had the constitutional
authority to fire him for any or no cause. President Donald Trump also had
the constitutional authority to order Comey to end the investigation of
Flynn. He could have pardoned Flynn, as Bush pardoned Weinberger, thus
ending the Flynn investigation, as Bush ended the Iran-Contra investigation.
What Trump could not do is what Nixon did: direct his aides to lie to the
FBI, or commit other independent crimes. There is no evidence that Trump did
that.
With these factors in mind, let's turn to the Comey statement.
Former FBI Director James Comey's written statement, which was released in
advance of his Thursday testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee,
does not provide evidence that President Trump committed obstruction of
justice or any other crime. Indeed it strongly suggests that even under the
broadest reasonable definition of obstruction, no such crime was committed.
The crucial conversation occurred in the Oval Office on February 14 between
the President and the then director. According to Comey's contemporaneous
memo, the president expressed his opinion that General Flynn "is a good
guy." Comey replied: "He is a good guy."
The President said the following: "I hope you can see your way clear to
letting this thing go."
Comey understood that to be a reference only to the Flynn investigation and
not "the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to the
campaign."
Comey had already told the President that "we were not investigating him
personally."
Comey understood "the President to be requesting that we drop any
investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his
conversations with the Russian ambassador in December."
Comey did not say he would "let this go," and indeed he did not grant the
president's request to do so. Nor did Comey report this conversation to the
attorney general or any other prosecutor. He was troubled by what he
regarded as a breach of recent traditions of FBI independence from the White
House, though he recognized that "throughout history, some presidents have
decided that because 'problems' come from the Department of Justice, they
should try to hold the Department close."
That is an understatement.
Throughout American history -- from Adams to Jefferson to Lincoln to
Roosevelt to Kennedy to Obama -- presidents have directed (not merely
requested) the Justice Department to investigate, prosecute (or not
prosecute) specific individuals or categories of individuals.
It is only recently that the tradition of an independent Justice Department
and FBI has emerged. But traditions, even salutary ones, cannot form the
basis of a criminal charge. It would be far better if our constitution
provided for prosecutors who were not part of the executive branch, which is
under the direction of the president.
In Great Britain, Israel and other democracies that respect the rule of law,
the Director of Public Prosecution or the Attorney General are law
enforcement officials who, by law, are independent of the Prime Minister.
But our constitution makes the Attorney General both the chief prosecutor
and the chief political adviser to the president on matters of justice and
law enforcement.
The president can, as a matter of constitutional law, direct the Attorney
General, and his subordinate, the Director of the FBI, tell them what to do,
whom to prosecute and whom not to prosecute. Indeed, the president has the
constitutional authority to stop the investigation of any person by simply
pardoning that person.
Assume, for argument's sake, that the President had said the following to
Comey: "You are no longer authorized to investigate Flynn because I have
decided to pardon him." Would that exercise of the president's
constitutional power to pardon constitute a criminal obstruction of justice?
Of course not. Presidents do that all the time.
The first President Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger, his Secretary of
Defense, in the middle of an investigation that could have incriminated
Bush. That was not an obstruction and neither would a pardon of Flynn have
been a crime. A president cannot be charged with a crime for properly
exercising his constitutional authority
For the same reason President Trump cannot be charged with obstruction for
firing Comey, which he had the constitutional authority to do.
The Comey statement suggests that one reason the President fired him was
because of his refusal or failure to publicly announce that the FBI was not
investigating Trump personally. Trump "repeatedly" told Comey to "get that
fact out," and he did not.
If that is true, it is certainly not an obstruction of justice.
Nor is it an obstruction of justice to ask for loyalty from the director of
the FBI, who responded "you will get that ('honest loyalty') from me."
Comey understood that he and the President may have understood that vague
phrase — "honest loyalty" — differently. But no reasonable interpretation of
those ambiguous words would give rise to a crime. Many Trump opponents
were hoping that the Comey statement would provide smoking guns.
It has not.
Instead it has weakened an already weak case for obstruction of justice.
The statement may provide political ammunition to Trump opponents, but
unless they are willing to stretch Comey's words and take Trump's out of
context, and unless they are prepared to abandon important constitutional
principles and civil liberties that protect us all, they should not be
searching for ways to expand already elastic criminal statutes and shrink
enduring constitutional safeguards in a dangerous and futile effort to
criminalize political disagreements.
The first casualty of partisan efforts to "get" a political opponent —
whether Republicans going after Clinton or Democrats going after Trump — is
often civil liberties. All Americans who care about the Constitution and
civil liberties must join together to protest efforts to expand existing
criminal law to get political opponents.
Today it is Trump. Yesterday it was Clinton. Tomorrow it could be you.
Then-Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, James Comey, testifies
in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, May 3, 2017, in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Eric Thayer/Getty Images)
Alan Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard
Law School and author of "Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law" and
"Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for the Unaroused Voter."
Follow Alan M. Dershowitz on Twitter
Justice
by Alan M. Dershowitz
June 8, 2017 at 9:15 am
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10497/trump-comey-obstruction-justice
The statement may provide political ammunition to Trump opponents, but
unless they are willing to stretch James Comey's words and take Trump's out
of context, and unless they are prepared to abandon important constitutional
principles and civil liberties that protect us all, they should not be
searching for ways to expand already elastic criminal statutes and shrink
enduring constitutional safeguards in a dangerous and futile effort to
criminalize political disagreements.
The first casualty of partisan efforts to "get" a political opponent —
whether Republicans going after Clinton or Democrats going after Trump — is
often civil liberties. All Americans who care about the Constitution and
civil liberties must join together to protest efforts to expand existing
criminal law to get political opponents.
Today it is Trump. Yesterday it was Clinton. Tomorrow it could be you.
In 1992, then President George Walker Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger and
five other individuals who had been indicted or convicted in connection with
the Iran-Contra arms deal. The special prosecutor, Lawrence Walsh, was
furious, accusing Bush of stifling his ongoing investigation and suggesting
that he may have done it to prevent Weinberger or the others from pointing
the finger of blame at Bush himself. The New York Times also reported that
the investigation might have pointed to Bush himself.
This is what Walsh said:
"The Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has
now been completed with the pardon of Caspar Weinberger. We will make a full
report on our findings to Congress and the public describing the details and
extent of this cover-up."
Yet President Bush was neither charged with obstruction of justice nor
impeached. Nor have other presidents who interfered with ongoing
investigations or prosecutions been charged with obstruction.
It is true that among the impeachment charges levelled against President
Nixon was one for obstructing justice, but Nixon committed the independent
crime of instructing his aides to lie to the FBI, which is a violation of
section 1001 of the federal criminal code.
It is against the background of this history and precedent that the
statement of former FBI Director James must be considered. Comey himself
acknowledged that,
"throughout history, some presidents have decided that because 'problems'
come from Justice, they should try to hold the Department close. But
blurring those boundaries ultimately makes the problems worse by undermining
public trust in the institutions and their work."
Comey has also acknowledged that the president had the constitutional
authority to fire him for any or no cause. President Donald Trump also had
the constitutional authority to order Comey to end the investigation of
Flynn. He could have pardoned Flynn, as Bush pardoned Weinberger, thus
ending the Flynn investigation, as Bush ended the Iran-Contra investigation.
What Trump could not do is what Nixon did: direct his aides to lie to the
FBI, or commit other independent crimes. There is no evidence that Trump did
that.
With these factors in mind, let's turn to the Comey statement.
Former FBI Director James Comey's written statement, which was released in
advance of his Thursday testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee,
does not provide evidence that President Trump committed obstruction of
justice or any other crime. Indeed it strongly suggests that even under the
broadest reasonable definition of obstruction, no such crime was committed.
The crucial conversation occurred in the Oval Office on February 14 between
the President and the then director. According to Comey's contemporaneous
memo, the president expressed his opinion that General Flynn "is a good
guy." Comey replied: "He is a good guy."
The President said the following: "I hope you can see your way clear to
letting this thing go."
Comey understood that to be a reference only to the Flynn investigation and
not "the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to the
campaign."
Comey had already told the President that "we were not investigating him
personally."
Comey understood "the President to be requesting that we drop any
investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his
conversations with the Russian ambassador in December."
Comey did not say he would "let this go," and indeed he did not grant the
president's request to do so. Nor did Comey report this conversation to the
attorney general or any other prosecutor. He was troubled by what he
regarded as a breach of recent traditions of FBI independence from the White
House, though he recognized that "throughout history, some presidents have
decided that because 'problems' come from the Department of Justice, they
should try to hold the Department close."
That is an understatement.
Throughout American history -- from Adams to Jefferson to Lincoln to
Roosevelt to Kennedy to Obama -- presidents have directed (not merely
requested) the Justice Department to investigate, prosecute (or not
prosecute) specific individuals or categories of individuals.
It is only recently that the tradition of an independent Justice Department
and FBI has emerged. But traditions, even salutary ones, cannot form the
basis of a criminal charge. It would be far better if our constitution
provided for prosecutors who were not part of the executive branch, which is
under the direction of the president.
In Great Britain, Israel and other democracies that respect the rule of law,
the Director of Public Prosecution or the Attorney General are law
enforcement officials who, by law, are independent of the Prime Minister.
But our constitution makes the Attorney General both the chief prosecutor
and the chief political adviser to the president on matters of justice and
law enforcement.
The president can, as a matter of constitutional law, direct the Attorney
General, and his subordinate, the Director of the FBI, tell them what to do,
whom to prosecute and whom not to prosecute. Indeed, the president has the
constitutional authority to stop the investigation of any person by simply
pardoning that person.
Assume, for argument's sake, that the President had said the following to
Comey: "You are no longer authorized to investigate Flynn because I have
decided to pardon him." Would that exercise of the president's
constitutional power to pardon constitute a criminal obstruction of justice?
Of course not. Presidents do that all the time.
The first President Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger, his Secretary of
Defense, in the middle of an investigation that could have incriminated
Bush. That was not an obstruction and neither would a pardon of Flynn have
been a crime. A president cannot be charged with a crime for properly
exercising his constitutional authority
For the same reason President Trump cannot be charged with obstruction for
firing Comey, which he had the constitutional authority to do.
The Comey statement suggests that one reason the President fired him was
because of his refusal or failure to publicly announce that the FBI was not
investigating Trump personally. Trump "repeatedly" told Comey to "get that
fact out," and he did not.
If that is true, it is certainly not an obstruction of justice.
Nor is it an obstruction of justice to ask for loyalty from the director of
the FBI, who responded "you will get that ('honest loyalty') from me."
Comey understood that he and the President may have understood that vague
phrase — "honest loyalty" — differently. But no reasonable interpretation of
those ambiguous words would give rise to a crime. Many Trump opponents
were hoping that the Comey statement would provide smoking guns.
It has not.
Instead it has weakened an already weak case for obstruction of justice.
The statement may provide political ammunition to Trump opponents, but
unless they are willing to stretch Comey's words and take Trump's out of
context, and unless they are prepared to abandon important constitutional
principles and civil liberties that protect us all, they should not be
searching for ways to expand already elastic criminal statutes and shrink
enduring constitutional safeguards in a dangerous and futile effort to
criminalize political disagreements.
The first casualty of partisan efforts to "get" a political opponent —
whether Republicans going after Clinton or Democrats going after Trump — is
often civil liberties. All Americans who care about the Constitution and
civil liberties must join together to protest efforts to expand existing
criminal law to get political opponents.
Today it is Trump. Yesterday it was Clinton. Tomorrow it could be you.
Then-Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, James Comey, testifies
in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, May 3, 2017, in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Eric Thayer/Getty Images)
Alan Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard
Law School and author of "Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law" and
"Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for the Unaroused Voter."
Follow Alan M. Dershowitz on Twitter
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 8, 2017, 3:09:12 PM6/8/17
to
On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>Justice
>by Alan M. Dershowitz
Another jew asshole? Opinion dismissed.
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>Justice
>by Alan M. Dershowitz
Cheers!
RJ (preferred jew aliash)
Sick old pedo Andrew Andrzej Baron
Jun 8, 2017, 3:25:39 PM6/8/17
to
British neo-Nazi wanted to film himself killing a child
-------------------------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/mvganqe
<quote>
National Front member Cowen contacted paedophiles on social
networking sites and said how he wanted to film himself
killing a child.
Police raided his home after intercepting extremist CDs by
racist rock groups.
They found a Nazi shrine with swastikas, an SS flag and a
container of Zyklon B.
</quote>
Michael Ejercito
Jun 9, 2017, 12:48:58 PM6/9/17
to
"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
aliash)" wrote in message
news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>Justice
>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>Another jew asshole?
Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never fantasize
about their assholes.
>Opinion dismissed.
Not surprisingly, you fail to address the opinion.
Michael
bigdog
Jun 9, 2017, 1:28:02 PM6/9/17
to
Sooner or later the public is going to wise up to these faux scandals the Democrats and their media allies have been manufacturing and realize it is nothing more than partisan politics at its very worst. It's nice to know that there are still a few people of integrity around like Alan Dershowitz who recognize this for what it is and have the courage to say so.
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 9, 2017, 3:09:18 PM6/9/17
to
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>Justice
>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>
>>Another jew asshole?
> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
Dreckgook, there you go again, zsucking another jew rectum
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>Justice
>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>
>>Another jew asshole?
> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never fantasize
>about their assholes.
other subhumans.
>>Opinion dismissed.
>
> Not surprisingly, you fail to address the opinion.
>
>
>Michael
benj
Jun 9, 2017, 6:50:19 PM6/9/17
to
On 6/9/2017 1:28 PM, bigdog wrote:
> Sooner or later the public is going to wise up to these faux scandals the Democrats and their media allies have been manufacturing and realize it is nothing more than partisan politics at its very worst. It's nice to know that there are still a few people of integrity around like Alan Dershowitz who recognize this for what it is and have the courage to say so.
>
You think so?
> Sooner or later the public is going to wise up to these faux scandals the Democrats and their media allies have been manufacturing and realize it is nothing more than partisan politics at its very worst. It's nice to know that there are still a few people of integrity around like Alan Dershowitz who recognize this for what it is and have the courage to say so.
>
Let's review "honest" Jim Comey and his actions.
Remember "honest" Jim Comey? He's a lawyer. Does that give you a hint
about where this is going. Hey, who can you trust to tell the truth and
be honest than a lawyer, right? No, not some cop moving up the ranks to
head the FBI but the U.S attorney for the Southern district of New York.
His famous case was Martha Stewart. In case you've forgotten let me
refresh your memory of "honest" Jim Comey. Martha Stewart was suspected
of insider trading. But there was no real evidence. So she was never
charged. And that means she was never convicted. But "Honest" Jim Comey
has a brainstorm. Since it's a crime to lie to police and she told
police she was not guilty of insider trading, and everybody knows (easy
to judge that, just check "jokes" on late night "comedians") that she
was really guilty of insider trading...THEREFORE, SHE LIED TO POLICE by
saying she was innocent!
And Comey charged her with that "crime" and then even got a conviction!
Martha finally gave up trying to fight the might and majesty of the US
government and let the Comey scam stand instead of fighting the
limitless money and resources of the government for the rest of her
life. THAT is the kind if "integrity" this guy has.
Remember when Hillary CLinton clearly violated the law by having a
private server and having Antony Weiner print emails for her that he was
not allow to view. And even worse Weiner was involved in sexual pictures
of himself on the internet which as Democrats would normally gleefully
point out would make him vulnerable to blackmail. A person hardly safe
to view classified material even if he had clearance which he did not. I
wonder if Weiner ever attended a gathering of diplomats where the
Russion Ambassador was present? Special prosecutor anyone?
But in the end, "Honest" Jim Comey decided not to pursue any of these
crimes because the people were "good guys" to use Trump's expression.
Oddly the lawyerly argument is that Trump expressing his opinion that
Flynn was a "good guy" (meaning had no criminal intent ...he was a
retired general for crying out loud...) was inappropriate and
obstructing justice because Trump was president so anything he ever said
was to be taken as an "order". Yet, simply dropping irrefutable evidence
of Hillary crimes was somehow NOT "obstruction" of justice.
One has to wonder just how much contact "honest" Jim really had with the
Russians? Who is he really answering to? Hillary says "Honest" Jim cost
her the election. But he says differently.
So what did Comey and Trump say in private? Comey has self-serving memos
he wrote. Comely also has his word. And his word is that Trump always
lies and as for himself? Well his reputation is "honest" Big Jim Comey.
And that is MORE than enough proof for Democrats and most of the major
media. So Trump asked for "Loyalty" which Comey refused to offer and
then immediately leaked his self-serving memos of his private meeting
with the Boss. Obviously he never planned to be loyal. What kind of
crime is a Snowden-like leak of private executive conversations with the
boss? How long would YOU last if you had a private visit to the CEO's
office where you work and you then leaked all the details (certainly all
slanted to make you look good) to the internet?
There appear to be serious crimes here and they aren't by Trump...even
if the Democrats and media are doing their best to obstruct justice by
throwing lies and chaff into the wind.
Frank
Jun 9, 2017, 7:01:34 PM6/9/17
to
galore put in charge of agencies and in the case of the FBI spying on
the opposition.
Michael Ejercito
Jun 9, 2017, 9:44:28 PM6/9/17
to
"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
aliash)" wrote in message
>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>Justice
>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>
>>>Another jew asshole?
>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>Dreckgook, there you go again, zsucking another jew rectum
>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never
>> fantasize
>>about their assholes.
>Subnormal subhumans like you often zsuck the fat jew ani/recti of
>other subhumans.
>>>Opinion dismissed.
>>
>> Not surprisingly, you fail to address the opinion.
>>
>>
>>Michael
>Not surprisingly, opinions of jews are routinely dismissed.
Michael
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 10, 2017, 9:57:18 AM6/10/17
to
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 18:48:54 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
wrote about.
>>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never
>>> fantasize
>>>about their assholes.
>
>>Subnormal subhumans like you often zsuck the fat jew ani/recti of
>>other subhumans.
> You are the subnormal one here.
YOU are the subnormal subhuman here.
>>>>Opinion dismissed.
>>>
>>> Not surprisingly, you fail to address the opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>Michael
>
>>Not surprisingly, opinions of jews are routinely dismissed.
>
> Not by normal people.
By ALL normal people.
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:mcsljc52h2vdm1c3a...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>>Justice
>>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>>
>>>>Another jew asshole?
>>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>
>>Dreckgook, there you go again, zsucking another jew rectum
> Nithing, you yet again proved, ON THE SPOT, what I wrote about you.
Dreckgook, you yet again zsucked, ON THE SPOT, the very jew rectum I
>
>
>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:mcsljc52h2vdm1c3a...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>>Justice
>>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>>
>>>>Another jew asshole?
>>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>
>>Dreckgook, there you go again, zsucking another jew rectum
> Nithing, you yet again proved, ON THE SPOT, what I wrote about you.
wrote about.
>>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never
>>> fantasize
>>>about their assholes.
>
>>Subnormal subhumans like you often zsuck the fat jew ani/recti of
>>other subhumans.
> You are the subnormal one here.
>>>>Opinion dismissed.
>>>
>>> Not surprisingly, you fail to address the opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>Michael
>
>>Not surprisingly, opinions of jews are routinely dismissed.
>
> Not by normal people.
Loose Cannon
Jun 10, 2017, 6:45:45 PM6/10/17
to
>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>Justice
>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>
>>Another jew asshole?
> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>
> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never fantasize
>about their assholes.
You have a vagina? Normal men do not have vaginas.
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>Justice
>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>
>>Another jew asshole?
> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>
> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never fantasize
>about their assholes.
>>Opinion dismissed.
>
> Not surprisingly, you fail to address the opinion.
>
>
>Michael
jew's opinion.
!Jones
Jun 10, 2017, 11:29:27 PM6/10/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "Michael
Ejercito" <meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>Justice
I dunno... that's a little too strong of a statement. First of all,
"history" was never considered and, if it were, Donald has a history
of indifference to either truth, justice, or the American justice
system. A careful study of history and precedent wouldn't convince me
that Donald would be averse to doing such a thing as obstructing
justice if it worked in his favor.
As to Comey's statement: when asked point blank if Donald obstructed
justice, he said: "That's not for me to say." Thus, your sentence has
the negation in the wrong place; it should be: "Comey's statement does
not show that Trump obstructed justice."
The strongest claim you can make is "not guilty". Most people don't
believe he's innocent. While it has always appeared that Donald will
in fact "live to fight another day", the expected outcome was never
that Donald would be charged with obstruction; the objective was to
distract from, delay, and hopefully to derail his legislative
agenda... *that* worked quite well and it's not completely over yet.
I wouldn't do any victory dances just yet because Donald might very
well try to charge Comey... which is what we democrats are *praying*
he'll do. There is *nothing* we want to see like a big, public
Trump/Comey shit-fight dominating the news!
Jones
On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "Michael
Ejercito" <meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>Justice
"history" was never considered and, if it were, Donald has a history
of indifference to either truth, justice, or the American justice
system. A careful study of history and precedent wouldn't convince me
that Donald would be averse to doing such a thing as obstructing
justice if it worked in his favor.
As to Comey's statement: when asked point blank if Donald obstructed
justice, he said: "That's not for me to say." Thus, your sentence has
the negation in the wrong place; it should be: "Comey's statement does
not show that Trump obstructed justice."
The strongest claim you can make is "not guilty". Most people don't
believe he's innocent. While it has always appeared that Donald will
in fact "live to fight another day", the expected outcome was never
that Donald would be charged with obstruction; the objective was to
distract from, delay, and hopefully to derail his legislative
agenda... *that* worked quite well and it's not completely over yet.
I wouldn't do any victory dances just yet because Donald might very
well try to charge Comey... which is what we democrats are *praying*
he'll do. There is *nothing* we want to see like a big, public
Trump/Comey shit-fight dominating the news!
Jones
Sick old pedo Andrew Andrzej Baron
Jun 11, 2017, 3:09:09 AM6/11/17
to
More on neo-nazis and child porn
--------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7469180.stm
Neo-Nazi had child abuse images
Sick old pedo Andrew Andrzej Baron
Jun 11, 2017, 3:09:38 AM6/11/17
to
Thieving nazi vermin -- and they even steal from each other!
------------------------------------------------------------
Then...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_gold
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_plunder
And now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_Brotherhood
"The AB [Aryan Brotherhood] has focused on the economic
activities typical of organized crime entities, particularly
drug trafficking, extortion, inmate prostitution, and
murder-for-hire."
And (no surprise there), they even steal from each other!
"[David] Duke pleaded guilty to what prosecutors described as a six-year
scheme to dupe thousands of his followers by asking for donations.
Through postal mail, Duke later appealed to his supporters that
he was about to lose his house and his life savings. Prosecutors
claimed that Duke raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in this
campaign. Prosecutors also claimed he sold his home at a hefty
profit, had multiple investment accounts, and spent much of his
money gambling at casinos.[138][139][140]"
NEMO
Jun 11, 2017, 3:10:55 AM6/11/17
to
In article <letojcpki3i17i760...@4ax.com>,
FAKE Loose Cannon <efbe...@gmx.com> wrote:
> Once again, you fail to understand that nobody gives a shit about a
> jew's opinion. Nor about the opinion of that dumb polack bastard
> Once again, you fail to understand that nobody gives a shit about a
> Andrew "Andrzej" Baron who thinks he can be one of us ARYANS.
LOL!
!Jones
Jun 11, 2017, 8:07:04 AM6/11/17
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 10:28:01 -0700 (PDT), in talk.politics.guns bigdog
<jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Sooner or later the public is going to wise up to these faux scandals the Democrats and their media allies have been manufacturing and realize it is nothing more than partisan politics at its very worst. It's nice to know that there are still a few people of integrity around like Alan Dershowitz who recognize this for what it is and have the courage to say so.
Mr Dog, your indignation seems a bit contrived to me. First of all,
Donald is no stranger to scandal; he has probably been involved in
more lawsuits than anyone else in the country. It's not a
"manufactured" scandal; Donald fired Comey and that's real enough. He
could have, almost as easily, sat down privately with Comey and
discussed matter... but he didn't.
The democrats like anything that disrupts the republican agenda. We
don't *want* to see the national healthcare system thrown into chaos
and we will try to block you from doing so. This particular little
episode has about run its course; however, while it lasted, it
effectively tied up the republicans and forced them to focus on that.
If you think about it, didn't they follow *exactly* the same play book
on Hillary's e-mail server? You take whatever you can find and then
blow it up into a big scandal... yeah, there's nothing there; however,
the object is to distract her from running an effective campaign.
Well, we believe that Donald's agenda is damaging to the US;
therefore, we want to distract him... and we will keep doing so.
Knock off the phony indignation bit, OK? Yeah, it's politics; what
did you think it was before that suddenly dawned on you. The only
other option is to compromise and work together... it might be too
late for that.
Jones
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 10:28:01 -0700 (PDT), in talk.politics.guns bigdog
<jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Sooner or later the public is going to wise up to these faux scandals the Democrats and their media allies have been manufacturing and realize it is nothing more than partisan politics at its very worst. It's nice to know that there are still a few people of integrity around like Alan Dershowitz who recognize this for what it is and have the courage to say so.
Donald is no stranger to scandal; he has probably been involved in
more lawsuits than anyone else in the country. It's not a
"manufactured" scandal; Donald fired Comey and that's real enough. He
could have, almost as easily, sat down privately with Comey and
discussed matter... but he didn't.
The democrats like anything that disrupts the republican agenda. We
don't *want* to see the national healthcare system thrown into chaos
and we will try to block you from doing so. This particular little
episode has about run its course; however, while it lasted, it
effectively tied up the republicans and forced them to focus on that.
If you think about it, didn't they follow *exactly* the same play book
on Hillary's e-mail server? You take whatever you can find and then
blow it up into a big scandal... yeah, there's nothing there; however,
the object is to distract her from running an effective campaign.
Well, we believe that Donald's agenda is damaging to the US;
therefore, we want to distract him... and we will keep doing so.
Knock off the phony indignation bit, OK? Yeah, it's politics; what
did you think it was before that suddenly dawned on you. The only
other option is to compromise and work together... it might be too
late for that.
Jones
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 11, 2017, 9:02:31 AM6/11/17
to
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 01:34:23 +0200, The Foreskin Peeler
<finish...@my.Grik.anus.invalid> wrote:
[FLUHS Grik skata]
01:34:23 The [sic][SIC!!! LOL] Foreskin Peeler?
Seriously???
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!
<finish...@my.Grik.anus.invalid> wrote:
[FLUHS Grik skata]
01:34:23 The [sic][SIC!!! LOL] Foreskin Peeler?
Seriously???
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 11, 2017, 9:02:31 AM6/11/17
to
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 18:45:30 -0400, Loose Cannon <efbe...@gmx.com>
wrote:
>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>Justice
>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>
>>>Another jew asshole?
>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>>
>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never fantasize
>>about their assholes.
>
>You have a vagina? Normal men do not have vaginas.
GBLT gook ladyboys do!
wrote:
>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>Justice
>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>
>>>Another jew asshole?
>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>>
>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never fantasize
>>about their assholes.
>
>You have a vagina? Normal men do not have vaginas.
Michael Ejercito
Jun 11, 2017, 9:03:21 AM6/11/17
to
"Loose Cannon" wrote in message
news:letojcpki3i17i760...@4ax.com...
>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>Justice
>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>
>>>Another jew asshole?
>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>>
>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never
>> fantasize
>>about their assholes.
>You have a vagina? Normal men do not have vaginas.
Michael
The Peeler
Jun 11, 2017, 12:51:36 PM6/11/17
to
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 06:02:19 -0700, "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew
pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)" <rj...@TheWor1d.com>
wrote:
It's true.
pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)" <rj...@TheWor1d.com>
wrote:
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 11, 2017, 4:02:04 PM6/11/17
to
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 06:07:50 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
round your needledick.
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"Loose Cannon" wrote in message
>news:letojcpki3i17i760...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>>Justice
>>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>>
>>>>Another jew asshole?
>>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>>>
>>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never
>>> fantasize
>>>about their assholes.
>
>>You have a vagina? Normal men do not have vaginas.
> Sometimes, some normal men have vaginas wrapped around their penises!
>
>
>Michael
You, as a subnormal subhuman, are EXEMPT from having a vagina wrapped
>
>
>"Loose Cannon" wrote in message
>news:letojcpki3i17i760...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:53:23 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>>>aliash)" wrote in message
>>>news:t08jjc1f4v79etqao...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:42:26 -0700, "Michael Ejercito"
>>>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>History, Precedent and Comey Statement Show that Trump Did Not Obstruct
>>>>>Justice
>>>>>by Alan M. Dershowitz
>>>
>>>>Another jew asshole?
>>> Mangina, there you go again with your obsession with assholes.
>>>
>>> Normal men sometimes fantasize about their vaginas; they never
>>> fantasize
>>>about their assholes.
>
>>You have a vagina? Normal men do not have vaginas.
> Sometimes, some normal men have vaginas wrapped around their penises!
>
>
>Michael
round your needledick.
Sick old pedo Andrew Andrzej Baron
Jun 12, 2017, 4:50:01 PM6/12/17
to
Leading US neo-Nazi jailed for child porn possession
----------------------------------------------------
Kevin Alfred Strom (born 1956 in Anchorage, Alaska) is the former
Managing Director of National Vanguard, a Charlottesville-based
organization that has been described as a racist, white separatist,
homophobic, and a Neo-Nazi hate group by the Southern Poverty Law
Center and the Anti-Defamation League.[1][2] Strom resigned from
National Vanguard in July 2006.[3] National Vanguard reportedly
disbanded on March 14, 2007, and its website has been dormant since
that time. In 2008 Strom pleaded guilty to possession of ten images
of child pornography and was sentenced to 23 months in prison.[4]
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Alfred_Strom
Michael Ejercito
Jun 14, 2017, 11:11:19 AM6/14/17
to
"The Peeler" wrote in message
news:593c14c6$2$62781$b1db1813$919...@news.astraweb.com...
>On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 06:57:06 -0700, serbian bitch Razovic, the resident
>psychopath of sci and scj and Usenet's famous sexual cripple, making an ass
>of herself as "jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry'
>Shein's jew aliash)", farted again:
>>>>Not surprisingly, opinions of jews are routinely dismissed.
>>>
>>> Not by normal people.
>>
>> By ALL normal people.
>ALL normal and decent people dismiss YOUR retarded sick "opinions",
>>>
>>> Not by normal people.
>>
>> By ALL normal people.
>psychopath!
He became worth less than shit because of his choices and his conduct.
Michael
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 14, 2017, 4:11:21 PM6/14/17
to
On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:15:51 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"The Foreskin Peeler" wrote in message
>news:593c14c6$2$62781$b1db1813$919...@news.astraweb.com...
[FLUHS Grik skata]
> He became worth less than shit because of his choices and his conduct.
>
>
>Michael
You were excreted as less than shit because of your subhuman gook DNA.
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"The Foreskin Peeler" wrote in message
>news:593c14c6$2$62781$b1db1813$919...@news.astraweb.com...
[FLUHS Grik skata]
> He became worth less than shit because of his choices and his conduct.
>
>
>Michael
Michael Ejercito
Jun 15, 2017, 9:44:04 AM6/15/17
to
"The Peeler" wrote in message
news:593d7bf5$0$22936$b1db1813$a437...@news.astraweb.com...
>On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 12:51:20 -0400, Loose Sphincter, the unhappily married
>nazi homo, IMPERSONATING his master, The Peeler, whined again:
>>>Cheers!
>>>
>>>RJ (preferred jew aliash)
>>
>> It's true.
>bitches these groups have ever seen!
All they have are racism and Judenhass.
Michael
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 15, 2017, 1:30:22 PM6/15/17
to
On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 06:48:37 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"The Foreskin Peeler" wrote in message
>news:593d7bf5$0$22936$b1db1813$a437...@news.astraweb.com...
[FLUHS Grik skata]
> All they have are racism and Judenhass.
>
>
>Michael
All YOU got is ainlungus and judenliebe.
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"The Foreskin Peeler" wrote in message
>news:593d7bf5$0$22936$b1db1813$a437...@news.astraweb.com...
[FLUHS Grik skata]
> All they have are racism and Judenhass.
>
>
>Michael
Michael Ejercito
Jun 16, 2017, 10:37:40 AM6/16/17
to
"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
news:2mg5kc1ulk3dcjcqd...@4ax.com...
>On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 06:48:37 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>"The Foreskin Peeler" wrote in message
>>news:593d7bf5$0$22936$b1db1813$a437...@news.astraweb.com...
>[FLUHS Grik skata]
>> All they have are racism and Judenhass.
>>
>>
>>Michael
>All YOU got is ainlungus and judenliebe.
Judenhass.
Michael
jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew aliash)
Jun 16, 2017, 1:39:17 PM6/16/17
to
On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 07:42:14 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
against your ainlungus/judenliebe.
<meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:2mg5kc1ulk3dcjcqd...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 06:48:37 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>"The Foreskin Peeler" wrote in message
>>>news:593d7bf5$0$22936$b1db1813$a437...@news.astraweb.com...
>
>>[FLUHS Grik skata]
>
>>> All they have are racism and Judenhass.
>>>
>>>
>>>Michael
>
>>All YOU got is ainlungus and judenliebe.
>
> I have no anilingus, and my Judenliebe is the best defense against
>Judenhass.
>
>
>Michael
You got, HEAP jew ainlungus and our judenhass is the best defence
>
>
>"jew pedophile Ron Jacobson (jew pedophile Baruch 'Barry' Shein's jew
>aliash)" wrote in message
>news:2mg5kc1ulk3dcjcqd...@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 15 Jun 2017 06:48:37 -0700, "NOT Michael Ejercito"
>><meje...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>"The Foreskin Peeler" wrote in message
>>>news:593d7bf5$0$22936$b1db1813$a437...@news.astraweb.com...
>
>>[FLUHS Grik skata]
>
>>> All they have are racism and Judenhass.
>>>
>>>
>>>Michael
>
>>All YOU got is ainlungus and judenliebe.
>
> I have no anilingus, and my Judenliebe is the best defense against
>Judenhass.
>
>
>Michael
against your ainlungus/judenliebe.
Sick old pedo Andrew Andrzej Baron
Jun 17, 2017, 7:13:51 AM6/17/17
to
Oriental guy is super math genius (so much smarter than sick old
pedo Andrew "Andrzej" Baron, who made a "living" peddling defective,
pirated software... LOL!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_Tao
"Tao exhibited extraordinary mathematical abilities from an early age,
attending university level mathematics courses at the age of nine. He
and Lenhard Ng are the only two children in the history of the Johns
Hopkins' Study of Exceptional Talent program to have achieved a score
of 700 or greater on the SAT math section while just nine years
old. Tao scored a 760.[3] In 1986, 1987, and 1988, Tao was the
youngest participant to date in the International Mathematical
Olympiad, first competing at the age of ten, winning a bronze, silver,
and gold medal respectively."
Further achievements:
- Ph.D at age 21 (Princeton).
- full professor at UCLA at age 24.
- Won the Fields Medal (highest award in math), at the age of 31.
- Breakthrough Prize in Mathematics (2014)
- Royal Medal (2014)
And numerous others
(see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_Tao#Notable_awards).
Sick old pedo Andrew Andrzej Baron
Jun 17, 2017, 7:15:16 AM6/17/17
to
"gooks"? LOL! Two Oriental geniuses won Nobel Prize in physics when they
were 30 and 34 years old... and just what did sick old pedo Andrew "Andrzej"
Baron win?
Read about these fine geniuses:
https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1957/
0 new messages