Nobody ever trespasses on government property. All that happens is that someone says they are trespassing.

All this stuff is said in regular court cases under regular circumstances. It is also said by some of the freemen.

The difference is how and when it is said, and the circumstances.

Standing present, unrepresented won't cut it alone. A common law court of record must be required as well. And to start into such a court, there needs to be a claim by the accused who was probably a defendant until he made the claim. Courts recognize this stuff all the time. It's all standard law.

If you go and write a list of freeman stuff, for all we know, the freeman said all this when he was already found guilty, and it was his closing statement before sentencing. There needs to be a chronological order listed before anybody can know what you are actually talking about.

Anybody can mess things up. Read the differences between freeman stuff, and a man making a legal claim, at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5197289.msg52994494#msg52994494.

This isn't anything new or damning. Lets look at some quotes...

"In his new testimony, Mr. Sondland said he believed that withholding the aid — a package of $391 million in security assistance that had been approved by Congress — was “ill-advised,” although he did not know “when, why or by whom the aid was suspended.” But he said he came to believe that the aid was tied to the investigations.

“I presumed that the aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anticorruption statement,” Mr. Sondland said."


"In his updated testimony, Mr. Sondland recounted how he had discussed the link with Andriy Yermak, a top adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, on the sidelines of a Sept. 1 meeting between Vice President Mike Pence and Mr. Zelensky in Warsaw. Mr. Zelensky had discussed the suspension of aid with Mr. Pence, Mr. Sondland said.

“I said that resumption of the U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anticorruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” Mr. Sondland said in the document, which was released by the House committees leading the inquiry, along with the transcript of his original testimony from last month."

"Mr. Sondland’s new testimony contradicted the notion that he was a lone wolf pushing the quid pro quo idea himself, and portrayed him instead as just the messenger who had discovered there was a linkage between the aid and the investigations and articulated it to others. He said it “would have been natural for me to have voiced what I presumed” about what was standing in the way of releasing the military assistance."

 I see lots of presumptions, assumptions, and beliefs, but no evidence of anything but Trump doing investigations relating to the 2016 elections, as he is entitled to as the chief of the executive branch. Funny how Trump has been subject to nonstop investigations one after another since 2016 (and before really), and none of that is "for personal political gain", but Trump investigating a PASSED election, well that's just too far! The assertion that Trump needs to do this to win over Joe Biden is even more laughable. Joe can't even keep himself together, or his hands to himself.

The reason why people lose in government complaints against them is in 5 things:
1. They stand represented rather than present in court;
2. They don't require the facing of their accuser (government, on the indictment) on the stand to question him;
3. They don't require evidence/proof of harm, damage, or threat;
4. They don't require at least one witness against them;
5. The don't require evidence that they were the doer of the harm, damage, or threat.

If defendants did these 5 things in a claim filed right into the complaint filed against them, close to 100% of guilty by complaint verdicts would be innocent or case dismissed... except when someone filed a following claim/counter-claim into the accusers claim he filed into the government's complaint. But government can't file a claim, because government as government is never harmed, damaged, or threatened. Government is only paperwork.

You and others spent years defending the Game-Protect account while I called him a scammer.  Talk about horrible judgement.  I did get a laugh out of seeing how long it took you and your window licking crew to get up to speed.  I look forward to 5 years from now when you same morons start complaining about Vod's behavior. 

Addressing the topic at hand...  It's pretty clear Flying Hellfish is a snowflake and moderates as such.  I don't think the powers that be really care, so long as he deletes spam.

No source of any kind, sounds reliable. Also certainly doesn't sound like a horribly fumbled and failed attempt at entrapment either.

For example, if someone is publicly accused of having killed someone around July 2019, they will support it without having the proof and knowing at what day and how the killing happened!

I guess I'm going to be going on a crusade in the next few days regarding garbage spam posts from people (sig campaign or not)

I mean even in my idea, there are issues of what do different people determine 'serious' -- though I would assume that most think that it's fair to stop posting on the 4000 page posts on here. Things like "WHY IM AN ATHESIST" WITH 4000000000 REPLIES and so on and so forth.

I would like to see a lot of the garbage go to one area, and the more serious disccusions staying here. We'd have to work to define what 'serious' means though.

Even if we had some broad rules like no personal attacks, etc. That would do something.



I mean -- I'm pretty biased when it comes to the no signatures part. Though I dont see much of an issue with a QUALITY poster posting with a signature. If they are rewarded for their work then so be it.

But ya know, a tad biased on the matter cause below.....

I actually suggested half-jokingly in some other thread that we should create a conspiracy sub-board for P&S. There is a bit of a problem with that though. Who gets to decide what is a conspiracy?

Perhaps it needs to go the other way. Maybe P&S needs to be left as is and the more serious discussions need to move into their namesake board.

I have a theory.

GP is a scammer, first and foremost.
These threads are bad for building a con but it is still possible, especially if you try to obfuscate the truth and justify your wrongdoing.

By diverging the topic from anything substantial and by repetitively stating, "all of those who oppose me are inherently flawed," game-protect is attempting to pawn off the scam as a misconstrued situation.

GP has already laid the foundation for their scam system and thus to discard it so easily without attempting to vie for some more victims is the least logical thing to do.

---

Think like a scammer and you will understand GP's mentality.

Traits of a Narcissistic Sociopath
How do you spot a sociopathic narcissist? Watch for certain traits:

No apologies, no guilt, no remorse under any circumstance. A sociopathic narcissist believes that she is a gift to the world who makes it richer and more colorful. Therefore, her calculated, even cruel actions are always justified.
Invincibility. The narcissistic variety of sociopath believes he is indomitable. Even punishment and prison can't stop him. They're merely part of the game.
Wholly self-serving. The needs and wants of others are insignificant and undeserving of consideration.
Act as the producer, director, and only actor of his own show. The narcissistic sociopath casts people in roles that increase his power and sense of importance and when bored, casts them aside.
A driven quest for power. If a narcissistic sociopath cares about anything other than himself, it is destructive power and control over people.

https://www.healthyplace.com/personality-disorders/sociopath/beware-the-narcissistic-sociopath

The differential treatment of Biden and Trump re women does seem interesting. Biden is Creepy Joe without actually molesting any, and Trump blurts out what a sexy daughter he has and who wouldn't want to do her?

But going back a bit, I would bet you don't recall what the editors of Penthouse said about Bill Clinton. Praising him, and suggesting everyone vote for him, the magazine editorial ended... "It's about time we have a man in the White House with balls, who fucks."

Twitchy, I'm starting to think he's only trolling and trying to waste everybody's time. He's not accessible to logic and he's the worst kind of weasel I've seen, here.

He knows he's at fault, but there's no way to get anything useful out of this conversation. Many have tried, as this thread proves.

Joe has to make it to the primary without springing a leak or molesting another child on camera first.

Yes, I have spoken and communicated with the lawyer who resolved the case, once again I have no intention to lie about it. I hope you believe me.

It makes plenty of sense. If it is not related to the op, then what are you rambling on about other than the fact you don't like what I say? What relevance to the op does this have at all? It is really simple.

Polls, always with the polls. Polls are easily manipulated. It amazes me how many of you forgot all the polls with 90%+ saying Hillary was going to win already. Keep dreaming, the Democrats don't have anyone with a chance in hell of beating Trump.

It amazes me how many of you forgot all the polls with 90%+ saying Hillary was going to win already.

Polls, always with the polls. Polls are easily manipulated. It amazes me how many of you forgot all the polls with 90%+ saying Hillary was going to win already. Keep dreaming, the Democrats don't have anyone with a chance in hell of beating Trump.