Breaking Moore accuser admits forging yearbook
- Thread starter Jtommyj
- Start date
J let me try to make this as plain as I can.
We have a contract. For 1 million dollars. I sign it.
Later you come back and forge it to 1.25 million to DECEIVE me.
My SIGNATURE is still real, is not a forgery.
But because the 1 mil was raised to 1.25 mil the DOCUMENT is now a Forgery.
Signature-legit
Document-forgery
Is it making sense?
These guys here seem to think only signatures can be forged. That is not true.
That's as simple as I can possibly explain it.
Yes,the signature can be legit but the item or document can be a forgery.
It isn't always all or nothing.
Just because a signature is legit doesn't mean the whole document is but we've got a few Meatheads here (not specifically you) that can't distinguish legal nuance and repeatedly have shown their ignorance;and lack of education by talking about Lukeskywalker and all kinds of stupid bullshit.
We have a contract. For 1 million dollars. I sign it.
Later you come back and forge it to 1.25 million to DECEIVE me.
My SIGNATURE is still real, is not a forgery.
But because the 1 mil was raised to 1.25 mil the DOCUMENT is now a Forgery.
Signature-legit
Document-forgery
Is it making sense?
These guys here seem to think only signatures can be forged. That is not true.
That's as simple as I can possibly explain it.
Yes,the signature can be legit but the item or document can be a forgery.
It isn't always all or nothing.
Just because a signature is legit doesn't mean the whole document is but we've got a few Meatheads here (not specifically you) that can't distinguish legal nuance and repeatedly have shown their ignorance;and lack of education by talking about Lukeskywalker and all kinds of stupid bullshit.
Last edited:
The signature MAY be authentic. Depending on the action filed in court, a judge MAY end up in position to interpret this to be a fact as well as how the law applies to it. The point then doesn't have to do with case law. It has to do with whether or not a signature in a yearbook means anything other than a silly young waitress thought it would be cool to get a regular at the diner, who happened to be a DA, sign her yearbook. J, I'm sure you've met many a young lass who wanted a momento of their meeting with you. Have some empathy, damn it!
As far was what the law means, what it says, how do you interpret the law, that's up to each person to decide. If all judges interpreted one way and all other people in the US interpreted the other way, those judges may be impeached, voted out, or removed by other means.
The people who write a law would best understand what the law means. Then you have the legislators who voted on the law and what they thought the law meant when they passed it. Then you have an executive's interpretation who signed it into law. Then you have courts decide cases, like you said. But those interpretations are subject to reversal. And, on top of that, you must remember that the judge only interprets the law as it applies to the case before him. That goes for the Supremes also. When the majority decision states what a law means, that interpretation may change later should they review another case.
Judges have their opinions, just like everyone else. Their opinion does hold sway when it comes to the case before them. Other than that, as they say, opinions are like a$$holes....you know the rest.
Last edited:
Normally, I find that the ability to grasp nuance is proportional to the average length of one's posts. This is what comes to mind when I see people criticize the lengths of your posts. You try to make things clear. Of course, some people have the talent to say more in fewer words. God bless those who can. Conversely, some people take ten paragraphs to compose a fine tasty word salad.
Variety is the spice of life, I guess.
I get driven that way around here because I find myself repeatedly stating the same thing when some people for whatever reason can't hear no matter how many times you say the same thing.
I don't know if it's a comprehension issue,intellect problem, or just it doesn't agree with me issue so im not paying attention.
I'll say this, I've NEVER in my life had to repeat myself to grown ass men who either purposefully or not are so obtuse so many times.
As to people who complain about post length they can eff themselves.
If they don't have the intellectual capacity to stay focused longer that a CNN sound bite and comprehend too bad.
I don't speak in talking points. If someone is used to Maddow length clips,yeah,theyre probably gonna have an issue following and digesting.
That's on their DNA. Dumbing down isnt my strong point.
I'm used to training Masters level employees who get it quickly, not people you have to show video and photos of Biden repeatedly and they still can't see it.
Alot of times I think the post length is a cop out,oh Its so long I can't understand.
From people who claim to be college graduates but yet get befuddled by anything longer than 25 words.
Well.like I said they can eff themselves,put me on ignore if it's too challenging to follow along, or learn to read and comprehend something longer than 5 minutes.
I purposely time my posts that it takes me no longer than 5 minutes to read.
Maybe we have some challenged readers
I definitely know we have comprehension challenged.
I'll say this,I've read some long ass posts that included some long articles and I've read them and never complained.
Whining isn't in my DNA. APPARENTLY SOME need the served on the silver platter treatment.
2.5 minutes to read.
Maybe some need to stick to making memes and memes forums where 2 seconds is about average attention span you need.
But I'm not changing my style because a few mental midgets get their ADHD in an uproar when it takes longer than 2 -4 minutes to read a post. Like I said, they can put me on ignore,go eff themselves,or learn to develop an attention span longer than 2 minutes. I basically don't give a shit.
Think about it. It's the same 2 or 3 people we continually have to dumb down to. Put legal definitions right in front of their face and they challenge the editors. And of course they know more than a legal definition book that's probably still in the wrapper or he'd have a clue.
It's ridiculous.
Last edited:
It remains to be seen.
Jail, I doubt. Civil suit pretty good chance.
Allred censured but remember it's another case of the foxes watching the henhouse when you have lawyers watching lawyers.
Supposedly Allred has been contacting Moore to settle a libel suit,at least according to him.
So we'll see.
So your comparing a legal contract where someone might try to change the terms, to a person adding notes to their own high school year book?
Who knows if its valid or invalid? You cast doubt on it when you added your written date/place. Have you submitted it for authentication?
See the parallels?
J
JGregor
Guest
Seeing things through your eyes makes you right. But you most often ignore what is said to you.
There is nothing wrong with your persistence or trying to be right, nor should it be a problem for someone to disagree with you, it will only make you stronger or your opinion better, but you do not like someone to disagree with YOU. Toughen up.
And don’t put your adversaries issues down, it’s better to understand their position.
Brevity is the Soul of wit.
By the way you’re still on the Biden issue. For God’s sake where are the Accusers? None? Then drop it. No claim no foul.
J
JGregor
Guest
The signature MAY be authentic. Depending on the action filed in court, a judge MAY end up in position to interpret this to be a fact as well as how the law applies to it. The point then doesn't have to do with case law. It has to do with whether or not a signature in a yearbook means anything other than a silly young waitress thought it would be cool to get a regular at the diner, who happened to be a DA, sign her yearbook. J, I'm sure you've met many a young lass who wanted a momento of their meeting with you. Have some empathy, damn it!
As far was what the law means, what it says, how do you interpret the law, that's up to each person to decide. If all judges interpreted one way and all other people in the US interpreted the other way, those judges may be impeached, voted out, or removed by other means.
The people who write a law would best understand what the law means. Then you have the legislators who voted on the law and what they thought the law meant when they passed it. Then you have an executive's interpretation who signed it into law. Then you have courts decide cases, like you said. But those interpretations are subject to reversal. And, on top of that, you must remember that the judge only interprets the law as it applies to the case before him. That goes for the Supremes also. When the majority decision states what a law means, that interpretation may change later should they review another case.
Judges have their opinions, just like everyone else. Their opinion does hold sway when it comes to the case before them. Other than that, as they say, opinions are like a$$holes....you know the rest.
I totally understand your point, but your not realizing the importance point. The final interpretation on law is how the Judges interpret it. I’m not a lawyer but as as CPA working in tax law, when there is a dispute on the application/interpretation of the law, what court cases say is the answer.
J
JGregor
Guest
Yep. Read a law book. I'm not comparing shit. The legal scholars and legal definitions are.
Please find an opposing viewpoint if you disagree.
Ovah
Your ignorance on a subject doesn't change change the law.
Last edited:
Wrong.
Read a law book.
You danced around everything but the questions asked.
Am amused spectacular? More like an uneducated bystander.
Is that what those three questions you had for me last night before you went beddy byes?
Spectating?
Lol.
Last edited:
Well now that I have your approval after turning a blind eye to your hero Biden molesting toddlers your pathetic child molesting ass enabler means nothing.
Yes, you are. You have been attempting to make a comparison to someone changing the terms in a signed contract by doctoring the language... to that of a person writing in a date and location after the yearbook inscription and signature. That really is an amazing leap. Like connect one side of the Grand Canyon to the other with dental floss and then trying to walk across.
At least the people of Alabama have more common sense then you.
You need to be a spectator. There's only one or two subjects youre knowledgeable enough on to participate in.
And law isn't one of them.
Weren't you accused of
Lol that's because it's a valid comparison.
Jesus Christ read a book or a legal opinion instead of playing a game of mental masturbation.
You'd answer your own question with 30 seconds on Google. You're just afraid of the answer. It's not going to turn out well for you.
Common sense isn't legal sense.
Keep stomping your feet and kicking
It ain't changing.
Blacks Legal Dictionary has no care of your opinion.
Why are you guys so afraid to get an actual legal opinion?
Why the fear?
J
JGregor
Guest
Reading a law book has not helped you. You need a guide, an interpreter and a teacher.
You are in over your head. It’s like me trying to teach you calculus. Hopeless, I give up!
And speaking of figure eights, you are a master in double talk and evasiveness. If you can skate like that you would be a hell of a hockey player. And you don’t give up.
Let me know when you have located Biden’s Accusers. It would be an easier task for you to look up Trump’s Accusers.
Because the legal definition DOES NOT MATTER when it comes to him writing the inscription. I guess you still don't get it. People elected the other guy because Moore is a CREEP. It might be perfectly legal to be a creep, but that doesn't mean people will vote for you.
Forest... meet the trees.
Last edited:
Gee j you really laid down your case.
What an assclown
You still hanging by Biden's balls I see
Legal definition doesn't matter but yours does ? Lol.
Now I've seen it all.
Dude please quit embarrassing yourself
Forgery includes more then a signature or inscription.
I'm patiently waiting for your counterpoint to Blacks Legal Definition.
Do you have one or are you just humping up your post count?
Of course you don't have one.
Where does Moore being a creep come in with regards to an Inscription. Youre loony
It isn't about HIM writing an inscription it's about HER adding to it.
That is FORGERY.
What do you mean the legal definition doesn't matter? Why do you think Allred and her client appeared on national TV? TO try to swing the legal definition of.her adding notes to the yearbook. Her,not him.
Look it up . But you won't..
Christ get a freaking clue.
Last edited:
In accounting, you're probably right. When dealing with the issue of rights and constitutional issues, not so much.
More insight from the toddler molesters enabler.
Please type in English. I don't speak child molester enabler.
Was she developed?
Was the video a fake?
Are the pics photo shopped?
You're a worse enabler than Moore supporters to
I love watching guys who have nothing to do with accounting continually school you. Talk about amused bystander.
All due of course to the same reason I continue to school you in legal matters.
You're too lazy to look past "your particulars", your code for bullshit.
Speaking of figure eights youre gonna pull a groin trying to stumble over anything to do with legal.
Youre just too lazy to put in the effort to back up your "guesses"
Last edited:
alas, we do know that Biden will never run for POTUS. Those videos would be played on every network all the time.
I get it fine.
Again, for the 900th time him writing an inscription in the yearbook isn't FORGERY.
Her ADDiNG to it in an attempt to DECEIVE is forgery.
It's about her forging,not him. That's why she has a lawyer.
You can take the uneducated man's way out and claim I don't get it.
Or you can take the educated man's way out and prove the facts I've stated as wrong.
So what's wrong?
1 him writing the inscription isn't FORGERY?
2 her adding to the inscription in an attempt to DECEIVE is forgery?
And Puh-lease back up your point with something more profound than "you still don't get it"
Good God the lazy man's eternal out.
Moore's a creep. I have 32 cents in my pocket. Both have as much to do with whether she forged the yearbook.
NOT his inscription. Her additions in order to DECEIVE.
Do some work Gomer and prove me wrong if you're so sure you're right.
Last edited:
I guess after spending twenty-16, surpassing even SMF-level ridiculousness by posting about the pending presidency of Stankie Sanders almost daily ....you feel the need to be jumping up and down like you’re at the 8th grade picnic.
But if you had a clue you’d realize what you quoted had nothing to do with the outcome of last nights election , but rather was a comment regarding Allred & the tainted yearbook vis a vie a court of law.
Nothing at all about the election but you had to make it like that for your chirping.
You were so giddy, one can only hope you didn’t soil your pants.
Last edited:
Lol him writing the inscription is not the issue. If you'd close your mouth and open your eyes. I've never said the inscription was bad.
But you're so angry you can't see what I've written right in front of you dozens of times.
J look. If no less than 8 people see your a Dem shill, you NEVER do your homework or have your facts straight, you rely on your particulars whatever the hell they are,and you have YET TO EVER ADMIT YOURE WRONG ABOUT ANY SUBJECT WHAT YOU SAY MIGHT MEAN SOMETHING.
AS IT IS KEEP SPEAKING TODDLEREASE.
Was there a point buried in there?
Why give up? I'm eating your lunch.
Borrowing the grandkids Kermit the Frog Legal terms for TODDLERS doesn't help you from being a lost soul legally.
Mr I never read ,telling anyone they're over their head is precious. No wonder they're forcing you out to pasture.
Can you try this again in English? I don't speak toddlerease like you and Joe.
I see nothing in this that even remotely addresses the fact that she forged the yearbook by adding to it in order to deceive along with Miss Allred.
Not his inscription as Gomer can't get past,but the actual doctoring her and Allred addressed last Friday and admitted to.
Thank you
PS ask Joe how it goes.
Last edited:
It does in my mind. If there is no authentification and there are 2 different writing styles on the ball, there is no certainty it is real. The parallel to the yearbook is the same.
A spectator doesn't participate.
Spectator seems to be yet another word you don't don't understand.
