Originally posted by WulebgrFirst you said he wasn't convicted, then you said he was, each time using the statement to prove your point. Seems fairly straightforward to me, you'll say anything and contradict anything you've said earlier in order to win an argument. I will not waste time with you any longer.
Show me the contradiction.
Show me one sentence I've posted here that is false.
You said he wasn't accused. He was accused, indicted, and convicted on three of the sixteen counts. The convictions were overturned.
It's really fairly simple.
2 edits
Originally posted by General PutzerPerhaps you refer to:
First you said he wasn't convicted, then you said he was, each time using the statement to prove your point. Seems fairly straightforward to me, you'll say anything and contradict anything you've said earlier in order to win an argument. I will not waste time with you any longer.
Originally posted by Wulebgr
I apologize for believing that such felonies as accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents would constitute corruption. I certainly don't mean to suggest that the thirteen felonies for which he was indicted, but not convicted could constitute accusations of corruption. 🙄
I don't get off. I maintain the course towards accurate information and honest reporting of the past. Nort was convicted of three felonies. Not only was he accussed of corruption, he was proven corrupt. Now, following in the footsteps of the convicts from CREEP, North has his own radio show.
Perhaps it is your math that is faulty: He was indicted on sixteen counts. I stated there were thirteen for which he was not convicted, then added that there were three for which he was. These three are named in the first paragraph above.
13 + 3 = 16
I realize that the sarcasm I displayed confuses some people.
Originally posted by WulebgrThere ya go, welbugr......words right from your post....happy now? You certainly can't deny it, can you?
I apologize for believing that such felonies as accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents would constitute corruption. I certainly don't mean to suggest that the thirteen felonies for which he was indicted, but not convicted could constitute accusations of corruption. 🙄
...[text shortened]... upt. Now, following in the footsteps of the convicts from CREEP, North has his own radio show.
Originally posted by General PutzerAre you ret..... er, "special"? How old are you? 10? 11? He named three felonies North was convicted of and then said he wasn't convicted of 13 others. So North WAS convicted and Wulebgr never said he wasn't.
There ya go, welbugr......words right from your post....happy now? You certainly can't deny it, can you?
Originally posted by General PutzerOriginally posted by Wulebgr
copy and paste for ya, welbuuger...."and destruction of documents would constitute corruption. I certainly don't mean to suggest that the thirteen felonies for which he was indicted, but not convicted "
Really set yourself up for that one, stupid
13 + 3 = 16
I realize that the sarcasm I displayed confuses some people.
You were an officer? Your illiteracy is astounding.