Let's say that at the hearing Prenda says "we searched high and low for Lutz, but it's like he disappeared off the face of the Earth". Would the judge need to have some evidence that they're lying, or would "c'mon, that's ridiculous" (translated into legalese) be sufficient for the judge to issue sanctions? Further, lets say that they brought in documentation of their efforts to find Lutz (signed affidavits from neighbors saying they haven't seen him for weeks, a signed affidavit from his landlord that he suddenly stopped paying his rent, etc). Would the judge have to take that at face value and refrain from issuing sanctions on that particular issue?
Apparently, the day got off to a rocky start, after Ibrahim's lawyers informed the DOJ that they intended to file bar complaints against some of the DOJ legal team for their actions in court, specifically concerning "misrepresentations" made to the court.To play devil's advocate, maybe the DOJ lied to its own lawyers, and the lawyers didn't know what had been done about the witness.
Trust the computer. The computer is your friend. Death to the mutant commie traitors.
Oops, I thought anonymous was calling the article full of perjury, not the DMCA notices.
Look, s/he's a troll. If s/he made reasonable points, way fewer people would respond.
Perhaps you meant "hearsay"? Or "libelous material"? Since nothing in the article was covered by an oath to tell the truth, with the oath taking place in a formal proceedings, I don't see how "perjury" could apply.
In an effort to ensure fair and honest public feedback ... your acceptance of this sales contract prohibits you from taking any action that negatively impacts KlearGear.com, its reputation, products, services, management or employees.Aaahahahahah!
At least they didn't redact the page numberThat's because the page number isn't a memetic hazard.
It looks as if the FBI is way too willing to extend itself permissions that haven't been specifically granted. Maybe the investigating agents felt Kelley meant to give the agency carte blanche access to her and her husband's email accounts, but was unable to articulate her desire to have her privacy violated thanks to the stress she was under.The reason is simple: she forgot to say "Simon says".
Then the officer "observed" that Eckert was standing "erect with his legs together" and his "buttocks clenched." This was all the justification the Deming police neededI'm not saying that this justifies what they did, but it seems that wasn't the entirety of their justification. It seems the police who did the stop were told by other cops that Eckert was known to insert drugs into his rectal cavity. The thing is, those other cops were from Hidalgo County, a different different county than where the stop happened, so how did they get involved? The only thing I can think of is that the Hidalgo County cops told the Deming City cops "hey, if you ever stop a guy named Eckert, search his rectum for drugs".
Finally, he said he was not allowed to discuss this with anyone because they are under litigation.Imagine what they could get away with if they could keep the lawsuit dragged out indefinitely.
I wonder what he thinks of open source and Wikipedia...
- Thuen worked on Sophia and had access to the code.It's like SCO in miniature.
- Visdom's name is remarkably similar to Sophia. (The short version: Sophia is the goddess of wisdom. Wisdom/VISDOM.)
- There's no way Thuen could have come up with his own program in such a short period of time without copying substantial amounts of Sophia's code.
Some nasty pirate fabricated the spreadsheet, hacked into their computers, and planted it there. Then Gibbs hacked into their computers and stole it. See, no contradictions!
Notwithstanding that she was speaking in support of reauthorization of Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Senator Feinstein did not state, and she did not mean to state, that FAA surveillance was used in any or all of the nine cases she enumerated,Gee, it's like that thing called "context" doesn't exist...
"Fact is stranger than fiction, because fiction has to make sense." - Some famous person or another
I'm not sure why you even bother posting here. If you actually went about trolling intelligently you might put up a convincing argument to passersby.Because people reply to him. You replied to him, even though you realize he's a troll. He puts pretty much no effort into it and still gets returns.
Separately, in the filing, Gibbs notes that Hansmeier called him after Wright's original ruling, trying to get him to sign a document that would require him to lie, and also to indemnify both Hansmeier and Steele, in order to be included under the bond that Duffy, Hansmeier and Steele were organizing as required by Judge Wright's order. Basically, Hansmeier offered Gibbs a terrible deal: to get in on the bond that we're getting, you have to lie to the court and then basically accept any and all liability that may come down because of all thisIf this is true: why do it as a written contract? IANAL, but I'm pretty sure that a contract requiring you to commit perjury is unenforceable, plus it could end up being used as evidence.
All this "Zero Tolerance" bullshit is doing is making kids scared of all the wrong stuff. Why are they afraid of a cartoon drawing of a bomb?I doubt any of them were scared. It seems a lot more likely that they were a bunch of little assholes who got a kick out of getting another kid in trouble.
Re: Re: Mike grasping at legalisms again. Dotcom got milliions...
S/he is consistant: Mike Is Always Wrong.