ad: elecraft

FEMA Strikes Again!

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by W4LGH, Sep 12, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
  1. K4JF

    K4JF Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's a lost cause. Your current government (BOTH parties) is pushing electronic voting without accountability. Hack in and elect whomever you want!!
     
  2. WT2P

    WT2P Ham Member QRZ Page

    Move to Chicago.. I have my dead aunts, uncles, cousins, neighbors, dogs, cats, my old rum bottles and my hampster voting.

    *casts my 512th vote for mayor*

    yo
     
  3. K4JF

    K4JF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Thanks for the invite. I have visited Chicago and thoroughly enjoyed it (your museums are fantastic). But it's just too bloody cold there for me to move..... I am of the philosophy that you shouldn't be where the temperature goes below your age! :eek:)
     
  4. W6EM

    W6EM Ham Member QRZ Page

    The remarks were made by Bush at a campaign stop in Farmington, NM in 2004. It wasn't in written text, but was covered by media back then.
     
  5. W6EM

    W6EM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Oh, really?  "Ben", do you think that the DA, the judge, and grand jury don't understand Expost Facto?

    We need a few more prosecutions down Texas way.  What with Dubyah's No.1 campaign contributor in his first term still on the loose (Ken Lay, former CEO, Enron)

    Hey, those two kinda rhyme.  Lay, Delay.  That's what Bush's intentions probably were, come to think of it.  Delay, until the Statute of Limitations on fraud protected his chum-bud.

    His daddy taught him about that one.  Its too late to look at the Harken Energy divestiture.  Bet Bill Frist wishes he could stir that one back up.

    73,

    Lee
    W6EM
     
  6. WA5BEN

    WA5BEN Ham Member QRZ Page

    In other words, somebody said sombody heard somebody say something...
     
  7. WA5BEN

    WA5BEN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Ronnie Earle IS the DA. There is no judge in a Grand Jury proceeding. Earle has a habit of hand-picking grand jury members, then feeding them "evidence" that could never see light in a court room.

    Ronnnie Earle knows that indictment won't stand up, and his ploy has failed. That's why he hurried to empanel another grand jury and told them to issue a TOTALLY DIFFERENT indictment on the FIRST day they were in session? (Normally, a grand jury hears evidence, subpoenas witnesses, and conducts an investigation. NONE of that happened in this case.)

    Your head is so far up that you cannot see facts. Ronnie Earle is a grandstanding crook who pretends to fight corruption -- while ignoring rampant corruption in which he is up to his ears.

    I repeat: Hang the crooks. ALL of the crooks.
     
  8. W6EM

    W6EM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Funny, but I seem to recall national media showing Delay's attorney having petitioned a judge to have the indictment thrown out since Earle was "picking on" Delay. And, the judge said no.  I'm sure Delay's high-priced counsel checked the expost facto angle.  But, you might want to give him a call with your theory just in case, since Delay, the "Concierge of the House" rewards favors.

    Oh, I enjoy seeing facts, not hearing reactionary opinions and attacks spouted.

    On the second grand jury, I don't know why that was done, unless the first jury's term was nearing an end.

    I did hear, though, that the reason for the rush on the second indictment was because some sort of waiver of the Statute of Limitations for the particular offence was withdrawn at the last moment by Delay's counsel.  We'd call that a Delay tactic, now, wouldn't we?  So, like any good attorney who's faced with a hard deadline, he had to proceed and got the indictment on the last possible day, without Delay.

    Indictments aren't convictions.  And, apparently, judges can and do rule on their validity.  At least in Texas.  And, if that judge refused to dismiss the first one didn't learn about expost facto in his high school government class, or law school, boy, we just might have yet another fully qualified Supreme Court nominee......

    I didn't hear about Earle being corrupt.  Give us some facts, dates, names, and not just your shouting, that I can verify elsewhere.  I did hear that he once indicted a rather famous Texas Democrat.  So, apparently, when the ethical chips are down, he prosecutes objectively.

    Something about him not liking malevolent politicians, and being willing to forego his retirement a while.  Kinda makes him stand out as a man of priniciple.
     
  9. WA5BEN

    WA5BEN Ham Member QRZ Page

    Funny, but I seem to recall national media showing Delay's attorney having petitioned a judge to have the indictment thrown out since Earle was "picking on" Delay. And, the judge said no. I'm sure Delay's high-priced counsel checked the expost facto angle. But, you might want to give him a call with your theory just in case, since Delay, the "Concierge of the House" rewards favors.

    Oh, I enjoy seeing facts, not hearing reactionary opinions and attacks spouted.

    On the second grand jury, I don't know why that was done, unless the first jury's term was nearing an end.

    I did hear, though, that the reason for the rush on the second indictment was because some sort of waiver of the Statute of Limitations for the particular offence was withdrawn at the last moment by Delay's counsel. We'd call that a Delay tactic, now, wouldn't we? So, like any good attorney who's faced with a hard deadline, he had to proceed and got the indictment on the last possible day, without Delay.

    Indictments aren't convictions. And, apparently, judges can and do rule on their validity. At least in Texas. And, if that judge refused to dismiss the first one didn't learn about expost facto in his high school government class, or law school, boy, we just might have yet another fully qualified Supreme Court nominee......

    I didn't hear about Earle being corrupt. Give us some facts, dates, names, and not just your shouting, that I can verify elsewhere. I did hear that he once indicted a rather famous Texas Democrat. So, apparently, when the ethical chips are down, he prosecutes objectively.

    Something about him not liking malevolent politicians, and being willing to forego his retirement a while. Kinda makes him stand out as a man of priniciple.[/QUOTE]
    If you want facts, look at Earle's record. He has NEVER won one of these witch hunts. He can't get a conviction on flimsy and manufactured evidence -- not even in Travis County.

    He has deliberately lost big-time cases on some of his friends who were guilty as sin -- and thus they avoided further prosecution.

    Everyone knows about "judge shopping". You can always find a "friendly" judge to rule in the way you want, and the DA (or civil plaintiff) gets to choose the judge. That's how ridiculous rulings like the Pledge of Allegiance being unconstitutional come about. Of course, they don't stand up on appeal, but they make headlines.

    That is why we desperately need to get rid of activist judges with personal agendas that have nothing to do with the law.
     
  10. ki4buc

    ki4buc Ham Member QRZ Page

    FEMA is going to rename the EAS, to better reflect what it's used for:

    Office of
    Homeland
    Security
    Hazardous
    Incident
    Terminolgy and
    Rapid
    Uniform
    Notification

    [​IMG]

    P.S. It's a joke...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page