meco03211
For some reason I think it means over the underwear, under the pants.
Reminds me of when Colbert had NPH on the Colbert Report. They are talking about NPHs sexuality and I forget what prompted the quip but it was glorious. Something like “and that’s why you’re one of the most threatening gays because of how non threatening you are.”
That’s kinda what I think they mean by “normal” gay.
She’s campaigning for a WAP. Woman As President.
That says nothing about voting twice, it says attempting.
Had you read the actual statute you’d have found “voter fraud” to be the actual act of voting twice. In another section the modifier attempted is defined as basically attempting a crime defined elsewhere. So you can complain about justice not being served all you want, but the jury was not convinced he would have voted twice. You can say you’d have convicted him even, but you weren’t on the jury. I’m not arguing whether he should or shouldn’t have been convicted. The original question that prompted this chain was how he wasn’t convicted. I was providing a simple explanation as to why. Accept it or not. The part you missed was the part you explicitly said you didn’t look into. The actual law on this issue.