No they aren't, you clearly don't even know what that term means...

also you once again posted a correct definition and interpreted it incorrectly. maybe try simply being more intelligent and knowing what words mean, that may help you be correct more often.

There is no need to interpret a definition it is simple.
It is stated and not open to interpretation.
Please explain fully how the legal definition which is common place English
was "interpreted wrong" when I know exactly what it says and you can't
add things to what it means just because you feel like it.

no problem, here i'll show you the error of your ways:






People awaiting a trial have done nothing wrong, in the US we have a presumption of innocence until proven guilty through due process. That's kind of a pillar of out CJ system...

So first you say they are put there because it is understood they have done something wrong, then you posted a definition that said detention does not require wrongdoing. Your also posting a definition for a detention center that in this context violates the 4th and 5th amendments, because the detention is not done in waiting for a trial it is indefinite.

you're contradicting yourself constantly, this the misinterpretation of the definitions you yourself are posting.

Right? I'm sitting here /facedesking just reading this.

Hilldog in the house

Looks like Fox canceled its Utah debate after Trump said fuck off.


This post was edited by Mangix on Mar 16 2016 12:37pm

Yeah no. But thanks for trying.



That can only functionally work in a primary. It's worked for Trump in this primary when he was running against dumb candidates who were too stupid to attack him directly, where 99% of the total Republican advertising budget before March 1st was spent attacking one another instead of him, and it allowed him to take a plurality of the votes and delegates and build an insurmountable lead. Numbers like this don't work against a single candidate. You can't win a heads-up election when your opponent is 20 points more popular than you are, even if your opponent didn't have the built-in edge in the Electoral College. Right now he's the most-unpopular presumptive nominee in the history of modern politics, at a time when the electorate is the most polarized it's been in the modern era. That means he gets destroyed in anything resembling a neutral climate, so his party just has to hope that he either somehow blows it or that the climate somehow becomes more and more favorable to them as time passes.

All this talk about Democrats crossing over and voting for him is absolutely laughable. Not only will that not happen to a significant degree, but both true Independents and moderates will vote against him decisively and non-white turnout would explode. Hundreds of thousands of Democrats are crossing over into the GOP primaries to vote against him right now, so the idea that they're going to somehow be open to voting for him in November is just absurd.

ROFL gop debate canceled after Trump wont attend

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-debate-canceled-after-trump-wont-attend

Hmmm best way avoid getting exposed as a candidate with no policy? Skip the only place people challenge you on your policy.

He's just a chickenshit who's afraid he'll get roasted on the Jumbotron just like 2 debates ago.

'waste, fraud and abuse", anyone with an IQ over 25 knows that doesn't add up.