So, The Barbarian, you need to settle down with which version of the events you think in true. Because you just posted two different versions in two subsequent posts.
Which way was it?
Which way was it?
Roy Moore, OJ Simpson, And why I don't believe you.
- Thread starter fool
- Start date
Yeah. About that. No, he wouldn't. None of the agencies that looked at it would agree with your statement.
:chuckle: Okay, that was just about worth it.
Pocket mirror? Ouja board? Paranoid fantasy?
Nah. He had him detained so they could ask him why he didn't keep his mouth shut, which was Clarke's way of letting him know who the boss was...trouble with that is that Clarke didn't appear to know the answer.
I don't see that either one contradicts the other. BTW, one is a news report, not my words. Are you saying that because one is more detailed than the other, it's contradictory?
I do.
Sorry, they are both the same sequence.
A. Asks Clarke
B. Clarke affirms
C. Shakes head, and walks away.
The news story only adds that Clarke was belligerent in his response. No other difference.
A. Asks Clarke
B. Clarke affirms
C. Shakes head, and walks away.
The news story only adds that Clarke was belligerent in his response. No other difference.
Roy Moore Accuser’s Home Burns Down, Arson Task Force Investigating
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/tina-johnson-roy-moore-accuser-house-burns-down
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/tina-johnson-roy-moore-accuser-house-burns-down
It probably has something to do with the local media. Both the Moore accusers who were lying have stepped on toes other than Roy Moore.
This is almost amusing.
My understanding is;
A. Asks Clarke
B. Clarke confirms
C. Shakes head
D. Clarke asks if there's a problem
E. Walks away
Now let's look at your two versions
In this version you have the "Do you have a problem with that? as part of the response to the question. The "Do you have a problem with that? was in response to the head shake.
You first quote doesn't "only add that Clarke was belligerent in his response." You pulled that out of thin air. Clarke's question was in response to the head shake.
Let me make a brief PSA here on how to act in public since people seem to be struggling with that.
A. Are you Sheriff Clarke?
B. Clarke Affirms
C. Hey I'm a Twitter/Facebook/Instagram follower, can I shake your hand/take a selfie with you/have you baby?
Notice shaking your head is not up there in response to if he's Sheriff Clarke or not. Because he is Sheriff Clarke.
Roy Moore, OJ Simpson, And why I don't believe you.
With the Alabama Senate election over, why hasn't Judge Roy Moore filed a number of defamation suits against those women who accused him of inappropriate conduct when they were in their teens?
The answer revolves around the same reason as to why "The Donald" has failed to follow through on his threat to sue all the women who accused him of similar behaviour following the "Access Hollywood" tape!
Initiating such legal actions would allow the defence to examine the sexual histories of both Moore and Trump for the past 50 years - something that no responsible lawyer would allow these particular clients to avoid, like the plague!
Because the person who files a suit first is usually hiding something. Corfman in a fit of moronus, thinks she can clear her name by lying in court. Moore is not scared.
Roy Moore, OJ Simpson, And why I don't believe you.
With the Alabama Senate election over, why hasn't Judge Roy Moore filed a number of defamation suits against those women who accused him of inappropriate conduct when they were in their teens?
If Moore and Trump aren't scared that they have nothing to hide, then both would be filing defamation suits to clear their reputations!
The reality is that they both know that their past sexual histories could never stand up to the glare of intense public scrutiny - and now everybody knows it!
So I took another look.
So there you are. BTW, Black later said he shook his head because Clarke was wearing Dallas Cowboys gear and he was from Packer country. Apparently, he also shook his head when Clarke got hostile and said "do you have a problem with that?"
Go back and look. What I said, and what the news story said are true and compatible with each other.
No matter how you shake it, Clarke comes off as an insecure, thin-skinned bully, who never imagined that his abuse of power would come back to haunt him.
Now, it's likely to cost him a great deal of money. Might have cost him his job after the DOJ investigation concluded he might have committed a felony in the process.
So there you are. BTW, Black later said he shook his head because Clarke was wearing Dallas Cowboys gear and he was from Packer country. Apparently, he also shook his head when Clarke got hostile and said "do you have a problem with that?"
Go back and look. What I said, and what the news story said are true and compatible with each other.
No matter how you shake it, Clarke comes off as an insecure, thin-skinned bully, who never imagined that his abuse of power would come back to haunt him.
Now, it's likely to cost him a great deal of money. Might have cost him his job after the DOJ investigation concluded he might have committed a felony in the process.
Initiating such legal actions would allow the defence to examine the sexual histories of both Moore and Trump for the past 50 years - something that no responsible lawyer would allow these particular clients to avoid, like the plague!
Yep. But in Trump's case at least, that's not going away:
While allegations of sexual misconduct against powerful men in recent weeks have drawn wide public support and prompted quick response, women who came forward during the presidential race with accusations against Donald J. Trump said they spent the past year feeling dismissed and forgotten.
“With Trump, it was all brushed under the rug,” said Temple Taggart, who claimed Mr. Trump kissed her on the mouth when she was competing in his Miss USA pageant in 1997.
But that could change if a defamation lawsuit brought by a woman who accused Mr. Trump of unwanted sexual advances is allowed to proceed in New York State Supreme Court, a legal ruling that could come before the end of the year. Lawyers in the suit sought a subpoena seeking all Trump campaign records related to his female accusers. If the case advances, the accusers could be deposed, going up against Mr. Trump yet again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/...feel-forgotten-a-lawsuit-may-change-that.html
Joe Arpaio did.
So, for some closure to the Sheriff Clarke aside;
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...riff-david-clarke-lawsuit-20180122-story.html
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...riff-david-clarke-lawsuit-20180106-story.html
So Clarke is clean on all that.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...riff-david-clarke-lawsuit-20180122-story.html
And the Judge earlier threw out the rest of the suit;
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...riff-david-clarke-lawsuit-20180106-story.html
So Clarke is clean on all that.
And he's running for Senate;
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-sheriff-joe-arpaio-pardoned-by-trump-plans-to-run-for-senate/
Derf
Well-known member
Do you remember the original host of Family Feud? It was Richard Dawson (who had played Corporal Newkirk on the Hogan's Heroes sitcom). He used to kiss all the girls on the mouth when it was their turn to play the Feud. It always bothered me to see him do that. We actually had a family in our church that made it onto the show, and I was wondering if they would let him get away with kissing the wife and/or daughters. If I remember correctly, he didn't kiss them. I didn't ever hear the back-story, as to whether he tried and they told him off, or if he was gentlemanly and asked up front if it was ok.
It didn't seem to hurt them in the game--they won the biggest winnings of any family to that point (sometime in the 1980s).