Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Epstein Found Dead In Cell...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
    I'm assuming you're talking about Trump?
    Should it be any surprise to me whatsoever that you'd jump to yet another false conclusion?
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      He's a publicity hound and a conspiracy theorist who likes to inject himself into high profile cases. He also loves spending other people's money, and receiving money for services he did not render or consume.

      He's Tassman's kind of guy!
      Looked him up. Acquitted. So not necessarily accurate. However, he seems to like attention, so...
      Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

      Comment


      • Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
        Looked him up. Acquitted. So not necessarily accurate. However, he seems to like attention, so...
        Actually, no - he wasn't acquitted, it was a hung jury, and the charges were dropped. You probably found the OTHER time he got in legal trouble, for which he was acquitted.

        He just can't help himself!

        The formal case against Dr. Wecht began in January 2006, when he was indicted by a federal grand jury on 84 counts, including mail and wire fraud and theft from an organization receiving federal funds.

        The prosecution contended that Dr. Wecht, who has worked on dozens of celebrity death investigations, was misusing Allegheny County resources for the benefit of his private pathology business.

        It was the second time in his public career he faced such accusations. He was tried by Allegheny County on similar charges in 1981 and acquitted.

        On the eve of the January 2008 trial before U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab, the government dismissed 43 counts.

        During several weeks of testimony, the government presented dozens of witnesses, including many who told the jury about so-called "Wecht details."

        They explained that Dr. Wecht had staff from the coroner's office chauffeuring his family to events and running private errands for him -- including delivering hot dogs for a political fundraiser.

        Others testified that Dr. Wecht falsely inflated airfare bills submitted to private clients and charged for limousine rides that he never took.

        The government also alleged that administrative assistants for Dr. Wecht, who were paid primarily by the county, performed nothing but private work for their boss.

        After several weeks of testimony, the jury announced it was deadlocked on all of the counts. The government immediately said it would retry the case, but the defense filed a flurry of motions keeping it in appeals.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          That, sir, is called an opinion,
          https://www.standard.net.au/story/63...en-neck-bones/

          Comment


          • so if you respect pathologists so much, why don't you respect the report of the pathologist who actually DID the autopsy? These others were not even present.

            Comment


            • You're doing that thing again, Tass, where you found somebody who says something you agree with, so you ignore all his faults and place him high on a pedestal and launch into a butt kissing tirade.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                so if you respect pathologists so much, why don't you respect the report of the pathologist who actually DID the autopsy? These others were not even present.
                And the pathologist who DID the autopsy was not twice indicted by a Grand Jury, one case of which ended up in a hung jury - which obviously means that SOME members of the jury, having actually heard and seen the evidence, believed he was guilty.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  And the pathologist who DID the autopsy was not twice indicted by a Grand Jury, one case of which ended up in a hung jury - which obviously means that SOME members of the jury, having actually heard and seen the evidence, believed he was guilty.
                  And Tassman is one of the ones who mocks anyone who doesn't believe the data regarding global warming. Yet when it comes to his pet conspiracies, like Trump being a Russian Agent, or Epstein being Murdered, he rejects the actual data sources and believes some wacky conspiracy nuts who have no direct connection with the actual data.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    And Tassman is one of the ones who mocks anyone who doesn't believe the data regarding global warming. Yet when it comes to his pet conspiracies, like Trump being a Russian Agent, or Epstein being Murdered, he rejects the actual data sources and believes some wacky conspiracy nuts who have no direct connection with the actual data.
                    But you have to admit, he is quite eloquent about it.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      But you have to admit, he is quite eloquent about it.
                      If by "eloquent" you mean "psychotic" then yes.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        If by "eloquent" you mean "psychotic" then yes.
                        Seriously, usually when we have somebody that nutty, they can't even speak uh duh Engrish very well. Tassman mostly uses proper English with generous smatterings of superfluous adverbs and adjectives as lipstick for the porcine object.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          Seriously, usually when we have somebody that nutty, they can't even speak uh duh Engrish very well. Tassman mostly uses proper English with generous smatterings of superfluous adverbs and adjectives as lipstick for the porcine object.
                          Hannibal Lecter spoke goodly English too.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            You're doing that thing again, Tass, where you found somebody who says something you agree with, so you ignore all his faults and place him high on a pedestal

                            Comment


                            • You do that repeatedly. It's your trademark.

                              You're doing it again -- you can't help yourself!

                              Sure.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post



                                Sure.
                                In no way have you addressed the issue of of the possibility of foul play in Epstein's death and the consequent necessity for ongoing enquiries.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 12:07 PM
                                2 responses
                                25 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 03:46 PM
                                19 responses
                                157 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 01:52 PM
                                3 responses
                                40 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 09:08 AM
                                6 responses
                                59 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post RumTumTugger  
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 07:44 AM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Working...
                                X