more lies. I acknowledge them. for the former i recognize it for what it was which you seem to be incapable of. it did exactly what the prosecuter wanted no indictment. the difference is i see for the sham it was. you lack the ability to do so and defend it ignoring the fact that is was conducted in a manner that differed wildly from the norm. as for the second you misunderstand what it was about.
Oh, so now you acknowledge them, but you just don't recognize their findings. You have no evidence to support any of your beliefs...zero, zip, nada. You have no evidence the Ferguson prosecutor didn't want an indictment. You have no evidence Ferguson grand jury was conducted "wildly" different. You have no evidence of any misconduct related to the Ferguson grand jury. You have repeatedly falsely equated the Ferguson grand jury with a trial and as recently as just a few posts ago. You have no evidence the Ferguson grand jury was a "sham". Those are all minor insignificant details for you because you have a belief which trumps evidence and reason.
that you don't understand what the word implied means isn't my problem.
LOL, the bottom line here is you cannot prove your assertions. That's obfuscation PJ. I asked you to support your statement with evidence. This is what you said, "says you the guy who made the implied claim that 99.9932% of all grand juries are conducted improperly.". So again PJ, where is your evidence to support your assertion? It's with all your other evidence. It doesn't exist. You are making shit up again PJ. I never said or implied grand juries, much less, 99.9932% of them were conducted improperly - one of those damn minor details again PJ.
credible to whom? Me or you who has gone to the hilt to defend every shady as move done there? the evidence is out there i should it to you in the other thread yes it has and you continue to ignore the evidence that proves you wrong. No if you don't mind can you stop continuing the hissy fit you had in the fergason thread and quit derailing this thread because you didn't like my reference to the sham grand jury. I'm done arguing with some incapable of accepting anything that doesn't conform to your beliefs. so please don't reply further. you've decided your ok with making decisions based on fantasies and hate rather than cold hard facts and I'm done with it.
Well, I think you paragraph here really shows how disconnected your thoughts and beliefs really are. You have no idea what credible evidence is, all you can do and all you do is cast out personal attacks and obfuscate. But then you have few facts and your arguments are completely devoid of rational thought. Facts and reason are not "hissy fits" PJ, unfortunate as that may be for you. As lamentable as it may be for you PJ, fact and reason matter.
Last edited: