Red Hen restaurants
- Thread starter rog1187
- Start date
Not at all. Laughing at you snowflakes defending a despicable bitch who got exactly what she deserved. Then daddy attempts to come to the rescue, daddy who advocated for another woman breaking the law to deny someone a constitutional right, but I’m sure you don’t see the irony in that. And then you snowflakes parrot daddy’s made up story about the owner following them across the street.
Priceless! Hilarious!!!
Last edited:
Actually this thread is about the backlash of the Red Hen's actions.
And the video I shared is from a/the business owner where the Sander's family went to and was followed.
Convenient to forget that a business refused service to Joe Biden a couple years back.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny-news-biden-baker-sarah-huckabee-red-hen-20180626-story.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny-news-biden-baker-sarah-huckabee-red-hen-20180626-story.html
Difference: Biden wanted to use it as a photo op. SHS was just eating dinner, not looking for publicity.
The management in each restaurant declined each party due to their politics. There's no difference.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/06/we...elling-maga-throwing-poop-red-hen-restaurant/
Which one of you not mad guys is this?
Which one of you not mad guys is this?
Bahahahahahaha. You refuse to admit you were wrong. It is the leading indicator of your low intellect.
Being from Martinsburg, there's a decent chance that he is indeed a poster on one of these forums. I would have to go with one of our more clever guys, as coming up with the idea of collecting and tossing chicken shit at the restaurant is an act of brilliance.
and I tried to explain why what you pointed out is meaningless. Both restaurants ran off both political persons due to political differences. One restaurant didn't like Biden/Obama, the other didn't like Sanders. Both restaurants are guilty of discriminating against the patrons being discussed due to politics.
I'm not surprised that you don't get it either. I'm sure there are other inconsequential differences between the two incidents.
You make no distinction between someone who campaigned for a position vs. someone who applied for a job to work for the government? If you cannot make that distinction, then all of us should be eligible for the same kind of harassment, Just a short step before anarchy.
Three pages of it is libtards saying the word mad.
Just returned from Winchester VA.......read a newspaper that said it indeed did happen.
I was referencing Joe's penchant to not donate to charity. Jow asked and the owner said no. He was a standup guy in that situation. Personally, I would welcome anyone into my office. I wouldn't vote for Joe but I like him. I didn't vote for Obama, shocker isn't it, but I liked him. I wish the Repubs had a charismatic leader like him.-
Supposedly, one of the members of the party went outside and told them that sarah had gone back to the room and that he was not a Trump supporter and would they please stop harassing him and the rest of the party.
It was trump's THIRD version.
Damn, you're dumber than I thought you were. Trying to call out someone else being wrong when you are actually wrong and you draw attention to it.
It was the same one you ran your mouth about moron. It was the same order that SCOTUS lifted the restraining order against and you flapped your dicksucker about how it was only temporary and then showed your ignorance about grand juries. It was the same one everyone is currently mocking you for. You were wrong again. No surprise.
Not sure.....just glanced at it while eating a burgher with my granddaughters. I'm sure you can find out the name with minimal effort.
Give a link to someone proving Mike Huckabee lied.
In America you are innocent until proven guilty. Be an American.
Whats so funny? I just posted what I saw written in the todays Winchester newspaper. You aren't aware that most fast food joints have newspapers for customers. You to lazy to look it up?
I'm glad you brought up grand juries.
Your stupidity is impressive. You stated 5 errors in your last post above. Five errors in one post. Five errors in five sentences. That has to be some sort of record.
There may be an error in your out of contwxt quotes but I dont think there is based on my understanding and experience with grand juries. Of course you are the one who quoted majistrate court rules as your proof that I was wrong about a grand jury so nobody is going to take your word for it.
Just to be clear the entire paragraph you quoted and claimed had 5 errors in 5 sentences was cut and pasted from three legal websites so I am going to take their word for it.
Last edited:
A grand jury occurs in circuit court.
Damn!!!!!!!
The grand jury
- Summoning Grand Juries. — The court may order that a grand jury be summoned at each term of the circuit court or at any specified time for either a regular, special or adjourned term of court. The grand jury shall consist of 16 members, but any fifteen or more members attending shall constitute a quorum. The court shall direct that a sufficient number of legally qualified persons be summoned to meet this requirement as prescribed by Chapter 52, Article 2, Section 3, of the West Virginia Code of 1931, as amended.
- Objections to grand jury and grand jurors. —
- Challenges. — The prosecuting attorney or a defendant who has been held to answer in the circuit court may challenge the array of jurors on the ground that the grand jury was not selected, drawn, or summoned in accordance with law, and may challenge an individual juror on the ground that the juror is not legally qualified. Challenges shall be made before the administration of the oath to the jurors and shall be tried by the circuit court.
You are one amazingly stupid mother f'ucker. I feel sorry for you. You attempt to make an argument even after you are obviously wrong and you continue to double and triple down.[/QUOTE]
And you still think defendants can’t be present at grand juries, can’t have an attorney present and can’t cross examine witnesses and don’t realize grand juries occur on circuit court.
And you still think defendants can’t be present at grand juries, can’t have an attorney present and can’t cross examine witnesses and don’t realize grand juries occur on circuit court.[/QUOTE]
Nothing you posted contradicts anything I said. I said defendents dont have a right to be at a grand jury case involving them. They can be there if a prosecutor asks them to be but the prosecutor decides and they dont even have to tell you there is a grand jury case involving you.
There is no judge present in a Grand Jury...not a majistrate judge or otherwise.
Nothing in your quote says that a defendent can make their case to a grand jury. It says a defendent held to answer to a grand jury can challenge that grand jurors are qualified to hear the case.
Is your case that you have no idea what you are talking about because if that is your case you finally got something right.
You have tried several times to refute me and you still have not gotten into the right ballpark.
Quotes from various legal websites to question regarding grand juries
About defendants at a grand jury...
Secrecy. Grand jury proceedings are secret. No judge is present; the proceedings are led by a prosecutor; and the defendant has no right to present his case or (in many instances) to be informed of the proceedings at all. While court reporters usually transcribe the proceedings, the records are sealed
Regarding lawyers present at a grand jury...
Grand jury proceedings are much more relaxed than normal court room proceedings. There is no judge presentand frequently there are no lawyersexcept for the prosecutor. The prosecutor will explain the law to the jury and work with them to gather evidence and hear testimony.
Regarding defense attornies for witnesses or targets who are called before a grand jury...
Lawyers are not permitted to accompany clients into the grand jury room. Grand jury proceedings are closed, and witnesses are not entitled to be represented by counsel during the proceedings. Lawyers may, however, remain in a nearby hallway, and witnesses may leave the room to consult with their lawyers as needed. Lawyers sometimes advise their clients to exercise this right before answering every question. For example, a witness might repeatedly say, “I respectfully request permission to leave the room to consult with my lawyer before I answer that question.”
About defendants at a grand jury...
Secrecy. Grand jury proceedings are secret. No judge is present; the proceedings are led by a prosecutor; and the defendant has no right to present his case or (in many instances) to be informed of the proceedings at all. While court reporters usually transcribe the proceedings, the records are sealed
Regarding lawyers present at a grand jury...
Grand jury proceedings are much more relaxed than normal court room proceedings. There is no judge presentand frequently there are no lawyersexcept for the prosecutor. The prosecutor will explain the law to the jury and work with them to gather evidence and hear testimony.
Regarding defense attornies for witnesses or targets who are called before a grand jury...
Lawyers are not permitted to accompany clients into the grand jury room. Grand jury proceedings are closed, and witnesses are not entitled to be represented by counsel during the proceedings. Lawyers may, however, remain in a nearby hallway, and witnesses may leave the room to consult with their lawyers as needed. Lawyers sometimes advise their clients to exercise this right before answering every question. For example, a witness might repeatedly say, “I respectfully request permission to leave the room to consult with my lawyer before I answer that question.”
