2
WakingKnowledge 2 points ago +2 / -0

How about Chink virus?

2
WakingKnowledge 2 points ago +2 / -0

What about statute of limitations? Time must be up? This happened 5 years ago?

A statute of limitations is a law that sets the maximum amount of time that parties involved in a dispute have to initiate legal proceedings from the date of an alleged offense, whether civil or criminal. However, the length of time the statute allows for a victim to bring legal action against the suspected wrong-doer can vary from one jurisdiction to another and the nature of the offense.

4
WakingKnowledge 4 points ago +4 / -0

Well they got ripped off. All they bought was the United States of America Corporation which has been shut down permanently. The United States of America the Republic (1776) has been reinstated with Donald Trump as President!

1
WakingKnowledge 1 point ago +1 / -0

it is just common sense. I am not doing all the homework. You go find records from 1918!

4
WakingKnowledge 4 points ago +4 / -0

The "fact checkers" will tell you the same thing. In 1918 during the flu, everyone wore a mask. Wear a mask or go to JAIL! 1918 Spanish Flu picture!

2
WakingKnowledge 2 points ago +2 / -0

it was satire, so I deleted the post.

1
WakingKnowledge 1 point ago +1 / -0

it was satire. I deleted it.

4
WakingKnowledge 4 points ago +4 / -0

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/bacterial-pneumonia-caused-most-deaths-1918-influenza-pandemic

The work presents complementary lines of evidence from the fields of pathology and history of medicine to support this conclusion. "The weight of evidence we examined from both historical and modern analyses of the 1918 influenza pandemic favors a scenario in which viral damage followed by bacterial pneumonia led to the vast majority of deaths," says co-author NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. "In essence, the virus landed the first blow while bacteria delivered the knockout punch."

1
WakingKnowledge 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sorry I did not provide some eye bleach! :( Maybe you can?

1
WakingKnowledge 1 point ago +1 / -0

I know. Legal means nothing to these evil fucks. it is just a tool for them to use on us not the other way around because they own the law. I hope the army kills them all. It is the only way.

0
WakingKnowledge 0 points ago +1 / -1

Well karma is a bitch. Was just making a point that they even commit crimes on their own which are still prosecutable. If they are willing to do this to one of their own, what would they do to us if given the chance? Like is always said, "These people are sick"

32
WakingKnowledge 32 points ago +32 / -0

I am in the contract business and a contract is not valid if the person is mentally unfit to sign it. Another reason to be unfit is drugs or alcohol. What if he is on just a bit of adrenochrome to keep him going?

Mental Incapacity A person who lacks mental capacity can void, or have a guardian void, most contracts (except contracts for necessities). In most states, the standard for mental capacity is whether the party understood the meaning and effect of the words comprising the contract or transaction. This is called the "cognitive" test. Some states use what's called the "affective" test: a contract can be voided if one party is unable to act in a reasonable manner and the other party has reason to know of the condition. And some states use a third measure, called the "motivational" test. Courts in these states measure capacity by the person's ability to judge whether or not to enter into the agreement. These tests may produce varying results when applied to mental conditions such as bipolar disorder.

Alcohol and Drugs People who are intoxicated by drugs or alcohol are usually not considered to lack capacity to contract. Courts generally rule that those who are voluntarily intoxicated shouldn't be allowed to avoid their contractual obligations, but should instead have to take responsibility for the results of their self-induced altered state of mind. However, if a party is so far gone as to be unable to understand even the nature and consequences of the agreement, and the other (sober) party takes advantage of the person's condition, then the contract may be voidable by the inebriated party.

18
WakingKnowledge 18 points ago +18 / -0

That must be one of his "friends in low places"

3
WakingKnowledge 3 points ago +3 / -0

FUCK, it does. I just did it. SON OF A BITCH!

2
WakingKnowledge 2 points ago +2 / -0

I know. But I will never accept it.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›