It’s a sad state of affairs when Todd Haley is both the best coach on the roster and not the least likable.

You keep mentioning the callousness of the world while being the most callous fucking person on this article.  Go fuck yourself.  Be better.  You can care about global warming and individuals, even if they live a dream life as a have.  Once again, go fuck yourself for being an unethical, piece of shit.

Yeah, you don’t understand what  your “inalienable” rights are.  Constitutional rights are not unlimited.  NO constitutional right has ever been held to be unlimited. 

Hello, my name is human... and I come here for the farts.....

“Don, Jr.”

I would say “no kidding”, but apparently some people don’t get your point.

This article basically states that she doesn’t understand how it is useful. Implying that some “hard evidence” is necessary is a misunderstanding of what evidence actually is in the legal system. This author showed that she probably should stick to other topics.

For sure, fuck off.  For obvious reasons, for sure.

This is circumstantial evidence that Cohen was involved with the campaign.  (It’s also direct evidence that he was on the plane at a specific time and date). It is also evidence that would be used to impeach Trump, if he was a witness. By itself, it means little. With other evidence, particularly Trump’s statements…

It’s called circumstantial evidence. By itself, it means very little. That video along with other evidence could serve as bricks in the foundation of a case against Trump.

It’s unethical to take a percentage in a domestic relations case. 

Hey Gas, Grass or Ass, next time someone should pay you with an education so that you can learn what the 1st amendment is and how to spell it.

This is the strength of your comment, and it is a powerful one—a willed ignorance and willful stupidity so unbelievably thick as to be bulletproof

Dwight was below average after a significant arm injury.

You can rule out randomness.  Few decisions are made in life based upon a mathematical certainty.

How much is purely coincidence?  Well, considering that there are at least four different long sentences/paragraphs that are nearly identical in content, including specific words, phrases and order, it is highly unlikely that it is not plagiarism.

Post your links so people can actually respond to it rather than try to figure out where your numbers come from.

I just decided to take my business to Larks

This article makes the argument that it is likely that votes were changed because the evidence that we have shows that they got into the systems and had the ability to change votes.  Why would they stop when nothing else prevented them from certainly achieving their goals?  You idiots think that you are making a point…

Click on the links, moron. Then make inferences from the information provided in those links. That’s why he explains circumstantial evidence. It requires inferences to be made to support a proposition.