Dismiss Notice
Thanks for being a member of our community. Please donate toward site expenses if you can.

Romney to be indicted?

Discussion in 'Conspiracy Theories' started by Not The Guardian, Nov 3, 2012.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

Page 2 of 2
  1. RP12

    RP12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    48,878
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You might want to learn about google and ads. This was covered last year....
     
    RP12, Nov 3, 2012
    #26
  2. gamewell45

    gamewell45 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    24,711
    Likes Received:
    3,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I guess its ok to perjure yourself because its just a divorce trial.
     
    gamewell45, Nov 3, 2012
    #27
  3. RP12

    RP12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    48,878
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    Trophy Points:
    113

    It guess its ok to claim EP to cover your ass.....
     
    RP12, Nov 3, 2012
    #28
  4. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is a typical ******* thread with zero thought put into it. The statute of limitations on perjury in most states is 3 years. Massachusettes is one of those states. No state has a 10+ year statute of limitations on perjury. This divorce trial was in 1988, over 24 years ago. The other thing *******s like to ignore is that it is the Boston Globe driven by one of Obama's legal (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)es, Gloria Allred, that is asking for the testimony to be released and purely for political reasons. It has nothing to do with an indictment and everything with *******s being so desperate before this election that they have to try and make hay out of a trial well over a decade ago where there was no perjury. What the stock did after the trial is meaningless since Romney was asked what his opinion was of the stocks value at the time.
     
    Patriot911, Nov 3, 2012
    #29
  5. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I know all about Google and ads, thank you very much. The webmaster of RonPaul.com might want to learn how to keep certain ads from popping up. :mrgreen:
     
    DDave, Nov 3, 2012
    #30
  6. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Not only that but Romney doesn't even give a (*)(*)(*)(*) if the testimony is released or not. So I'm guessing there is pretty much nothing in there that anyone can use against him.
    http://times247.com/articles/romney-attorney-no-objection-to-allred-record-request

    Doesn't stop people from making up lies though.
     
    DDave, Nov 3, 2012
    #31
  7. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Well unless you can prove that Romney can predict the future, there's no chance that you could prove he was guilty of any wrong doing.

    And he testified to what the value of the stock was at the time, not what it would do in the future.
     
    DDave, Nov 3, 2012
    #32
  8. theunbubba

    theunbubba Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    17,892
    Likes Received:
    307
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I take it that you do not know how to post a link?
     
    theunbubba, Nov 3, 2012
    #33
  9. theunbubba

    theunbubba Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    17,892
    Likes Received:
    307
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I see they moved this drivel to the conspiracy theories where it belongs. You should stay here with it.
     
    theunbubba, Nov 3, 2012
    #34
  10. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I'm pretty sure he knows how to post a link.

    It's just tough to link to something that doesn't exist. :smile:
     
    DDave, Nov 4, 2012
    #35
  11. Sadanie

    Sadanie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Messages:
    14,427
    Likes Received:
    639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do you have any idea what psychobabble means, The post you are referring to may noy be the clearest or the better supported, but it has NOTHING to do with "psychobabble!"

    Maybe you should abstain from using words you don't understand?
     
    Sadanie, Nov 4, 2012
    #36
  12. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Would you prefer he used the term "bull(*)(*)(*)(*)"? Wouldn't you agree that is a more accurate description?
     
    DDave, Nov 4, 2012
    #37
  13. Sadanie

    Sadanie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Messages:
    14,427
    Likes Received:
    639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It certainly would be more appropriate to HER intent.

    But if you are trying to trap me in saying that I believe the post she was referring to was BS, no, I don't.
     
    Sadanie, Nov 4, 2012
    #38
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page