|
|
 | | Re: Trouble with IE, PNG and BS
|
| (...) That is great, except in some cases such as .announce.moc, which doesn't allow replies, so you are forced to set followups if you post there. (...) That is true, otherwise people trying to follow the thread on a newsreader will probably not (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Trouble with IE, PNG and BS
|
| (...) I just realised something which is that if you are changing the followup-to you should mark it at the bottom of the message (as I have just done). That is something Didier should have done. (...) I'm not sure how he is meant to know where (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
| (...) Of course, such indictments would ideally be brought by the justice department, hand-picked by Bush. Additionally, no Congressional investigations can occur (at least, not ones with subpoena power) without the blessing of the majority party. (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
| (...) Well, what I meant to say was: if there is such conclusive evidence out there, then where are the indictments? I know that there is a lot of speculative evidence, but nothing that would hold up in a court of law. You, of all people, have (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
| (...) John, are looking for evidence that the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen (and for which abundant evidence exists)? Or are you looking for evidence of subsequent lies, distortions, and exaggerations by the Bush administration (for which (...) (18 years ago, 13-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
