(10-12-2023 08:50 AM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 08:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 07:12 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 06:43 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 06:36 PM)450bench Wrote:  Can somebody que the videos of the black prosecutor chick speaking a few years ago to big crowds saying she’s gonna “get Trump” and “take him down”

She didn't use the word promise, so I guess that should mean something.

There are 10+ videos of this nutcase telling anyone who’ll listen that she’s going to “get Trump.”
It’s hilarious. One shows her really freaking out and crying and stuff. It was from around 2021. The poster child for TDS.

What do *you* think of all the testimony of the controller, the CFO, and the Deutsche Bank bankers on present trial? Or do you just 'glib' that over?

That isn't responding to the post. The post is about the AG campaigning on "getting Trump" years ago. What is your response to that?

Is it "getting Trump' when there may very well be actual fraud?

Does that escape you? If there us actual fraudulent activity, bummer for Trump. That is on him for a great part if what his own controller, own CFO, and outside banker is heard.

Did the NY AG force Trump to do those actions? I mean it's *only* the testimony of the long time Trump CFO and long time Trump controller to that effect..... and the 20 year banking partner......

In short, my response, as you demand, is that there sure seems to be pole of **** in Trumps house when she looked. And not the specious type that Bragg brought in NYC.

I'm still open to hear how Trump counters this, as is his right. And, if he counters it sufficiently I am more than open to changing my mind that the NY AG went overboard in pursuit. Right now it looks like she didnt.

Another ridiculous post.

This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.

This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

(10-12-2023 12:27 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 08:50 AM)MonarchManiac Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 08:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 07:12 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(10-11-2023 06:43 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  She didn't use the word promise, so I guess that should mean something.

There are 10+ videos of this nutcase telling anyone who’ll listen that she’s going to “get Trump.”
It’s hilarious. One shows her really freaking out and crying and stuff. It was from around 2021. The poster child for TDS.

What do *you* think of all the testimony of the controller, the CFO, and the Deutsche Bank bankers on present trial? Or do you just 'glib' that over?

That isn't responding to the post. The post is about the AG campaigning on "getting Trump" years ago. What is your response to that?

Is it "getting Trump' when there may very well be actual fraud?

Does that escape you? If there us actual fraudulent activity, bummer for Trump. That is on him for a great part if what his own controller, own CFO, and outside banker is heard.

Did the NY AG force Trump to do those actions? I mean it's *only* the testimony of the long time Trump CFO and long time Trump controller to that effect..... and the 20 year banking partner......

In short, my response, as you demand, is that there sure seems to be pole of **** in Trumps house when she looked. And not the specious type that Bragg brought in NYC.

I'm still open to hear how Trump counters this, as is his right. And, if he counters it sufficiently I am more than open to changing my mind that the NY AG went overboard in pursuit. Right now it looks like she didnt.

Well, this response tells me all I need to know about your credibility. Thanks for clearing up where you stand.

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.

This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.

This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Well, ****, then the stupid moron should have been careful then to follow the ******* law. It's not a hard law to follow really, don't provide made up data with no support data.

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.

This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.

This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Maybe you should call up Judge Engoron and tell him your conclusions.

Or, should I send you the number of the NY First Appellate Division, so you can call them up and tell them that you have already decided for them. Im sure they will hop right on it when Muscle Man tells them what is going on.

As for videotapes of AGs stating things about how they hope to clean up stuff, Im sure the history is replete with that as well.

Again, if trump can put on evidence that the **** that his own CFO, his own controller, and his own long term banking partner testified to were wholly untruthful and wholly unreliable -- I'll join you in your 'she said she was gonna do stuff' crusade.

Looks like a week into this there is a lot behind that door she opened, though.

But please scream and jump up and down without ever bothering with the testimony and evidence *at trial*. Not that I expect that scintilla or rational thought from you in the first place.

I love that the 'defense' to a politically targeted legal system is to 'not run afoul of the laws they wrote that allow them to target political opponents'.


With that logic, if black people don't want to get shot by racist cops, then need to not have malfunctioning tail lights.

(10-12-2023 02:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I love that the 'defense' to a politically targeted legal system is to 'not run afoul of the laws they wrote that allow them to target political opponents anyone who engages in persistent fraud'.


With that logic, if black people don't want to get shot by racist cops, then need to not have malfunctioning tail lights.

Fixed your a priori rhetoric for you Ham.

Speaking of logic (and rhetoric), maybe you should educate us on *who* wrote the particular fraud laws in play, and the history of *how* they were written to target "political opponents".

As to the second comment -- try this more realistic one one:

"if fraudsters dont want to get their business licenses pulled, or be subject to disgorgement fines, they need not pursue persistent fraud in their business dealing."

Please continue with paper thin rhetoric though.

(10-12-2023 01:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.

This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.

This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Well, ****, then the stupid moron should have been careful then to follow the ******* law. It's not a hard law to follow really, don't provide made up data with no support data.

Is it moronic that the AG valued Maralargo at $25million?

(10-12-2023 02:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I love that the 'defense' to a politically targeted legal system is to 'not run afoul of the laws they wrote that allow them to target political opponents'.


With that logic, if black people don't want to get shot by racist cops, then need to not have malfunctioning tail lights.

Precisely. And then he doubles down right after your post. What a loon.

(10-12-2023 02:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I love that the 'defense' to a politically targeted legal system is to 'not run afoul of the laws they wrote that allow them to target political opponents'.


With that logic, if black people don't want to get shot by racist cops, then need to not have malfunctioning tail lights.

Good point.

Stretching that analogy a bit further, it is the legal equivalent of the burka approach - - i.e., Arab men cannot possibly be expected to control themselves around women. So it is incumbent on women to cloak themselves entirely - - or else they will be responsible for what may happen.

(10-12-2023 02:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.

This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.

This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Maybe you should call up Judge Engoron and tell him your conclusions.

Or, should I send you the number of the NY First Appellate Division, so you can call them up and tell them that you have already decided for them. Im sure they will hop right on it when Muscle Man tells them what is going on.

As for videotapes of AGs stating things about how they hope to clean up stuff, Im sure the history is replete with that as well.

Again, if trump can put on evidence that the **** that his own CFO, his own controller, and his own long term banking partner testified to were wholly untruthful and wholly unreliable -- I'll join you in your 'she said she was gonna do stuff' crusade.

Looks like a week into this there is a lot behind that door she opened, though.

But please scream and jump up and down without ever bothering with the testimony and evidence *at trial*. Not that I expect that scintilla or rational thought from you in the first place.

Hypocrite on, ambulance boy. This case has no chance, now or in any appellate court.

Just like all the rest of the stuff you clowns have thrown against the wall, trying to convince yourselves “yeah, we got him now.”

Losers.

(10-12-2023 03:27 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 02:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I love that the 'defense' to a politically targeted legal system is to 'not run afoul of the laws they wrote that allow them to target political opponents'.


With that logic, if black people don't want to get shot by racist cops, then need to not have malfunctioning tail lights.

Good point.

Stretching that analogy a bit further, it is the legal equivalent of the burka approach - - i.e., Arab men cannot possibly be expected to control themselves around women. So it is incumbent on women to cloak themselves entirely - - or else they will be responsible for what may happen.

How terrible it is that fraud laws are used when the subject is fraud.

The horror.

How unjust.

(10-12-2023 02:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.
This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.
This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Maybe you should call up Judge Engoron and tell him your conclusions.

Engoron is the walking definition of a cheap political hack. There won't be any objectivity exercised in this case until several rounds of appeal.

Years ago, a Duke versus Florida State football game, scheduled to be a home game for Duke, was moved to either Jacksonville or Orlando as a "neutral site." Someone said, "Playing Florida State in Jacksonville/Orlando is a neutral site, like playing Notre Dame in Rome." That's pretty much what the entire New York judicial system is for Donald Trump.

If the case goes to the US Supreme Court, and if I were a Supreme Court justice, I would write an opinion stating, "Reversed and rendered in favor of defendant Trump on all charges. I would also direct Judge Engoron to recuse himself from all current and future cases until such time as he has completed remedial courses in constitutional law, property law, and banking law from an accredited law school."

Is the retarded monkey still banging on his drum?!?

I sure hope this thread gets saved, so we can look back on it in a year or two from now, and have a few more laughs.

(10-12-2023 03:19 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 02:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I love that the 'defense' to a politically targeted legal system is to 'not run afoul of the laws they wrote that allow them to target political opponents anyone who engages in persistent fraud'.


With that logic, if black people don't want to get shot by racist cops, then need to not have malfunctioning tail lights.

Fixed your a priori rhetoric for you Ham.

Speaking of logic (and rhetoric), maybe you should educate us on *who* wrote the particular fraud laws in play, and the history of *how* they were written to target "political opponents". Or is that just an example of exaggerative lip flapping?

As to the second comment -- try this more realistic one one:

"if fraudsters dont want to get their fing business licenses pulled, or be subject to disgorgement fines, they need not pursue persistent fraud in their business dealing."

I guess you think fraud is a speeding ticket, and prosecutors are racist cops. Got it.

I think that second restatement is tad more realistic than your not-so-on point rant in the second part of your post. Cmon Ham, you are *much* better than that exceedingly shoddy example of cheesy rhetoric you put out there.

I'm not really interested in continuing to engage with bull-headed people... but I will point out a few things.... where you can't argue with what I say so you reword it and then argue with that.

1) they didn't target ANYONE who engages in fraud. That's demonstrably false. They targeted their political opponent. The AG ran specifically on that platform... and you just ignore it... literally implying (just like the AG) that it never happened. Whether you want to call it gaslighting or not, that is precisely what it is. Ignore whatI told you to get you to elect me and pay attention instead to this 'new' spin on it.

2) Doesn't matter who wrote the law. What matters is whether or not the people currently executing it are doing so in good faith or not... just like the racist cop. It doesn't matter who wrote the law about tail-lights... what matters to a just society is if the cop is looking for 'anyone' who has malfunctioning tail-lights, or just black people

The thing about making up your own versions of what other people say or think and arguing with that is that it is like shadow boxing. Your opponent is masterfully skilled, knowing every response to every movement you make, able to protect himself from your most vicious attacks, and yet somehow you are always able to easily defeat them and feel good about yourself. But that's not reality.

The racist cop: Tail light analogy is spot on. Note that I never said he didn't have a broken tail-light. I just said he was specifically targeted because of his race... and the tail light was just the 'reason' that he found to do what he intended to do anyway.

(10-12-2023 03:34 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 02:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.

This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.

This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Maybe you should call up Judge Engoron and tell him your conclusions.

Or, should I send you the number of the NY First Appellate Division, so you can call them up and tell them that you have already decided for them. Im sure they will hop right on it when Muscle Man tells them what is going on.

As for videotapes of AGs stating things about how they hope to clean up stuff, Im sure the history is replete with that as well.

Again, if trump can put on evidence that the **** that his own CFO, his own controller, and his own long term banking partner testified to were wholly untruthful and wholly unreliable -- I'll join you in your 'she said she was gonna do stuff' crusade.

Looks like a week into this there is a lot behind that door she opened, though.

But please scream and jump up and down without ever bothering with the testimony and evidence *at trial*. Not that I expect that scintilla or rational thought from you in the first place.

Hypocrite on, ambulance boy. This case has no chance, now or in any appellate court.

Just like all the rest of the stuff you clowns have thrown against the wall, trying to convince yourselves “yeah, we got him now.”

Losers.

(212) 340-0400
https://www.nycourts.gov/Courts/AD1/Cour...ions.shtml
Contact info for the First appellate Division, New York.
Contact them and tell them of your new found discoveries, muscle man.

Im sure they will find your ranting here persuasive.

And I suggest you actually read my comments, instead of 'rant/slobber'. Trump has every opportunity to confront the evidence here. I'll wait until he does before having an opinion on *his* liability or not.

Jeezus Krist. Does it take a mention of 'roids or ripped male anatomy to actually make you read something and comprehend it?

At the front of it, there seems to be lot there about potential fraud. But maybe not to tards who really dont bother to read anything about it except the things they pull garble down their gullet as they read their favorite blog posts.

In the meantime, why dont you contact the NY courts above and let them know youve solved it for them.

(10-12-2023 04:01 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 02:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.
This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.
This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Maybe you should call up Judge Engoron and tell him your conclusions.

Engoron is the walking definition of a cheap political hack. There won't be any objectivity exercised in this case until several rounds of appeal.

Years ago, a Duke versus Florida State football game, scheduled to be a home game for Duke, was moved to either Jacksonville or Orlando as a "neutral site." Someone said, "Playing Florida State in Jacksonville/Orlando is a neutral site, like playing Notre Dame in Rome." That's pretty much what the entire New York judicial system is for Donald Trump.

If the case goes to the US Supreme Court, and if I were a Supreme Court justice, I would write an opinion stating, "Reversed and rendered in favor of defendant Trump on all charges. I would also direct Judge Engoron to recuse himself from all current and future cases until such time as he has completed remedial courses in constitutional law, property law, and banking law from an accredited law school."

I would also award attorney's fees.

(10-12-2023 04:00 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 03:27 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 02:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I love that the 'defense' to a politically targeted legal system is to 'not run afoul of the laws they wrote that allow them to target political opponents'.


With that logic, if black people don't want to get shot by racist cops, then need to not have malfunctioning tail lights.

Good point.

Stretching that analogy a bit further, it is the legal equivalent of the burka approach - - i.e., Arab men cannot possibly be expected to control themselves around women. So it is incumbent on women to cloak themselves entirely - - or else they will be responsible for what may happen.

How terrible it is that fraud laws are used when the subject is fraud.

The horror.

How unjust.

Gotcha.

How terrible is it that women be expected to cloak themselves in public? It is just the laws of Sharia being used.

How terrible is it that Uigher slaves be expected to make shoes for their Chicom masters? It is just the laws of Red China being used.

How terrible is it that Palestinians feel a need to brutally attack Israeli innocents? It is just the mission statement of the elected government being used.

. . . . .

For someone who professes to have a high respect for the "law", tanq., you seem to have some pretty loose standards when it comes to for politically targeted prosecutions. The New York AG literally ran on a promise to bring a take down a specific individual. For me, that does start to a approach an "unjust" "horror".

Does it not bother you even a little? Or is it okay because the laws are just being "used"?

(10-12-2023 03:21 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 01:16 PM)450bench Wrote:  Another ridiculous post.

This woman, the prosecutor, has been videotaped at least a dozen times over the last 3 years, talking about how she will “get Trump” “throw him in jail,” calls him “an illegitimate President” etc. etc. she used those threats to even run for governor.

This case has no chance of legitimately sticking on the basis of facts but throw in the provable bias of the prosecutor and it’s really over.

Well, ****, then the stupid moron should have been careful then to follow the ******* law. It's not a hard law to follow really, don't provide made up data with no support data.

Is it moronic that the AG valued Maralargo at $25million?

bump

NEW UPDATE FROM JUDGE: ENGORON ADMITS HE WAS WRONG

Donald Trump’s attorney, Alina Habba, did not fail to tick a box to request a jury trial in the New York civil fraud case despite widely circulated claims. Judge Arthur Engoron amended his comments of “nobody asked for” a jury trial on Wednesday following the false reports, arguing the claim “keeps coming up”. He explained that New York Attorney General Letitia James “clearly checked off non-jury” before the proceedings began.



https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/10/12/...its-judge/