I do not know whether Donald Trump is guilty or innocent of any crime.

I am fairly certain that those in law enforcement pursuing him are dishonest and biased, and that they have cherry picked similarly dishonest and biased judges to hear their cases.

We have a huge bureaucracy in law enforcement and other areas of government who believe that imposing their will on the populace is more important than doing the will of the people or following our Constitution, and the patRIOT act and its progeny have enabled them like never before. And I see that as the biggest threat, by far, to our democratic republic.

(10-12-2023 11:46 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Good ole Clarence believes a judge of 20 years can’t be corrupt, knows all and is equal to Solomon. I posit a judge of 20 years is more likely to be dirty. He’s learned what he can get away with and knows who the players are.
But you do you Clarence. Another 50,000 words and you just might convince someone other than Tommy Bois.

Ahhh.... add *another* person who, simply because they make a ruling against your religious icon, *must* be 'corrupt'.

Brilliant deduction there.

And, hate to tell you, the opinion was well within how NY 63(12) rulings are made, and why they are made. Ahhh... but corruption must the answer. Lolz.

And, I will certainly look at a 20+ year jurist in the law a with a lot more gravitas than some bucktooth idiot on a message board, and a lot more gravitas than some asshat when presented with that difference in background in light of the bald determination of how wrong the opinion is, tells another to 'go suck [someone's] dick' simply because his ego is bruised.

You really cannot even write the above as fiction.

(10-13-2023 01:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I do not know whether Donald Trump is guilty or innocent of any crime.

I am fairly certain that those in law enforcement pursuing him are dishonest and biased, and that they have cherry picked similarly dishonest and biased judges to hear their cases.

We have a huge bureaucracy in law enforcement and other areas of government who believe that imposing their will on the populace is more important than doing the will of the people or following our Constitution, and the patRIOT act and its progeny have enabled them like never before. And I see that as the biggest threat, by far, to our democratic republic.

And THAT’S the deal. That’s the point and, for some, the rallying cry. It’s become THE source of distain of leftists.

(10-12-2023 11:46 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Good ole Clarence believes a judge of 20 years can’t be corrupt, knows all and is equal to Solomon. I posit a judge of 20 years is more likely to be dirty. He’s learned what he can get away with and knows who the players are.

Careful, don't want to trigger UofM with such highfalutin words!

(10-13-2023 01:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I do not know whether Donald Trump is guilty or innocent of any crime.

I am fairly certain that those in law enforcement pursuing him are dishonest and biased, and that they have cherry picked similarly dishonest and biased judges to hear their cases.

We have a huge bureaucracy in law enforcement and other areas of government who believe that imposing their will on the populace is more important than doing the will of the people or following our Constitution, and the patRIOT act and its progeny have enabled them like never before. And I see that as the biggest threat, by far, to our democratic republic.

I agree and it's the reason I don't believe anything coming out of the bureaucracy.

(10-12-2023 09:41 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  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/

The AG checking the 'no jury' box isnt the end of it as you seemingly make it to be above.

Only one party needs to 'check the jury box' for a jury trial to be considered. And Allina could have 'checked the jury box', and could have made a motion for it if the judge tossed it. And then nothing prevented her from arguing that motion.

The fact that there was no jury at the outset absolutely means that both sides *chose* non-jury. In that case, either Trump specifically chose to agree to a bench trial, or Habba never talked to her client about it and chose that route herself.

Bummer. Keep digging.

Bummer. Basic Civ Pro.

(10-13-2023 09:12 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 09:41 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  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/

The AG checking the 'no jury' box isnt the end of it as you seemingly make it to be above.

Only one party needs to 'check the jury box' for a jury trial to be considered. And Allina could have 'checked the jury box', and could have made a motion for it if the judge tossed it. And then nothing prevented her from arguing that motion.

The fact that there was no jury at the outset absolutely means that both sides *chose* non-jury. In that case, either Trump specifically chose to agree to a bench trial, or Habba never talked to her client about it and chose that route herself.

Bummer. Keep digging.

Bummer. Basic Civ Pro.

Its amazing how you keep doubling down on stupid.

We warned you not to fall for a Tom post that talked about the jury box not being checked. But it was anti-Trump, so you swallowed it.

When I presented you with lawyers from NJ, who were no fans of Trump, who said there was no jury trial option for this charge, you instead believed Tom. You didt believe the lawyers who deal with this in NY, you believed Tom.

Now that the judge has had to correct his own record, in which he falsely proclaimed Trumps team did not request a jury trial, and instead, a jury trial was not available due to the charge, you STILL BELIEVE TOM.

And the sad fact is if Trump's attorney did check a box for a jury trial, you'd be sky screaming for them to get disbarred because they attempted to grab a jury trial when it wasnt available.

(10-13-2023 08:00 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:46 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Good ole Clarence believes a judge of 20 years can’t be corrupt, knows all and is equal to Solomon. I posit a judge of 20 years is more likely to be dirty. He’s learned what he can get away with and knows who the players are.

Careful, don't want to trigger UofM with such highfalutin words!

Says the trigger queen

(10-13-2023 09:39 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 09:12 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 09:41 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  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/

The AG checking the 'no jury' box isnt the end of it as you seemingly make it to be above.

Only one party needs to 'check the jury box' for a jury trial to be considered. And Allina could have 'checked the jury box', and could have made a motion for it if the judge tossed it. And then nothing prevented her from arguing that motion.

The fact that there was no jury at the outset absolutely means that both sides *chose* non-jury. In that case, either Trump specifically chose to agree to a bench trial, or Habba never talked to her client about it and chose that route herself.

Bummer. Keep digging.

Bummer. Basic Civ Pro.

Its amazing how you keep doubling down on stupid.

We warned you not to fall for a Tom post that talked about the jury box not being checked. But it was anti-Trump, so you swallowed it.

When I presented you with lawyers from NJ, who were no fans of Trump, who said there was no jury trial option for this charge, you instead believed Tom. You didt believe the lawyers who deal with this in NY, you believed Tom.

Now that the judge has had to correct his own record, in which he falsely proclaimed Trumps team did not request a jury trial, and instead, a jury trial was not available due to the charge, you STILL BELIEVE TOM.

And the sad fact is if Trump's attorney did check a box for a jury trial, you'd be sky screaming for them to get disbarred because they attempted to grab a jury trial when it wasnt available.

Thats not how it works and taint is wrong. I read a pretty good article on it yesterday. It would not have mattered what box she checked either way based on the type of case and the obscure law they are using to persecute him Im not engaging the real estate clerk loon. If i find it i will send it to you.

Im -3 these fools to the limit of the rules from here on out.

Enough

(10-13-2023 09:39 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 09:12 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 09:41 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  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/

The AG checking the 'no jury' box isnt the end of it as you seemingly make it to be above.

Only one party needs to 'check the jury box' for a jury trial to be considered. And Allina could have 'checked the jury box', and could have made a motion for it if the judge tossed it. And then nothing prevented her from arguing that motion.

The fact that there was no jury at the outset absolutely means that both sides *chose* non-jury. In that case, either Trump specifically chose to agree to a bench trial, or Habba never talked to her client about it and chose that route herself.

Bummer. Keep digging.

Bummer. Basic Civ Pro.

Its amazing how you keep doubling down on stupid.

We warned you not to fall for a Tom post that talked about the jury box not being checked. But it was anti-Trump, so you swallowed it.

When I presented you with lawyers from NJ, who were no fans of Trump, who said there was no jury trial option for this charge, you instead believed Tom. You didt believe the lawyers who deal with this in NY, you believed Tom.

Now that the judge has had to correct his own record, in which he falsely proclaimed Trumps team did not request a jury trial, and instead, a jury trial was not available due to the charge, you STILL BELIEVE TOM.

And the sad fact is if Trump's attorney did check a box for a jury trial, you'd be sky screaming for them to get disbarred because they attempted to grab a jury trial when it wasnt available.

That's it, there was no Box to check and if there was. I would like to see the actual document that has the Charge with the Box to check for a jury trial.

I told them this wasn't a jury trial case 20 pages ago. They didn't listen because Orange Man Bad.

Engoron added that a checked box as part of a request from Trump's legal team for a jury trial wouldn't have mattered anyway because the relief was equitable.

"It would not have helped to make a motion, nobody forgot to check off a box," Engoron said.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-lawyer-vi...al-1833941

The real estate clerk boy needs to just have a drink and a good long cry

Why yall keep entertaining that weirdo is beyond me . He would get you the death penalty for a speeding ticket

(10-13-2023 10:06 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  I told them this wasn't a jury trial case 20 pages ago. They didn't listen because Orange Man Bad.

For pages and pages.



Just read taints posts in this voice. It moderately funny then.


(State school, youre dumb, 7th grade, toodles....reeeeeeee)

(10-13-2023 09:39 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 09:12 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 09:41 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  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/

The AG checking the 'no jury' box isnt the end of it as you seemingly make it to be above.

Only one party needs to 'check the jury box' for a jury trial to be considered. And Allina could have 'checked the jury box', and could have made a motion for it if the judge tossed it. And then nothing prevented her from arguing that motion.

The fact that there was no jury at the outset absolutely means that both sides *chose* non-jury. In that case, either Trump specifically chose to agree to a bench trial, or Habba never talked to her client about it and chose that route herself.

Bummer. Keep digging.

Bummer. Basic Civ Pro.

Its amazing how you keep doubling down on stupid.

We warned you not to fall for a Tom post that talked about the jury box not being checked. But it was anti-Trump, so you swallowed it.

When I presented you with lawyers from NJ, who were no fans of Trump, who said there was no jury trial option for this charge, you instead believed Tom. You didt believe the lawyers who deal with this in NY, you believed Tom.

ANd that doesnt touch the issue of any attorney, and a client (any attorney, any client) can *request* a jury trial (checking one of two boxes in a Note of Issue), make a motion, and argue it. Habba never filed any Notice of Issue. She simply went with the flow of a no jury trial.

Just like the judge commented.

I dont care which way she went -- but it is ridiculous to complain about it when they very much could have motioned it, and argued it.

Quote:Now that the judge has had to correct his own record, in which he falsely proclaimed Trumps team did not request a jury trial,

Read the above. Not just that, you misstate what the judge said. Here is his direct quote at the start of the trial: "“Neither side asked for one (a jury trial)". Kind of 180 degrees apart from what you say he proclaimed above.

Quote:and instead, a jury trial was not available due to the charge, you STILL BELIEVE TOM.

it may not. But again, *nothing* prevents an attorney, or a client (any attorney, any client) from *requesting* the jury trial, making a motion, and arguing that motion that a jury trial is proper. Sometimes a judge will grant that to a limited extent.

The only issue is Trump complaining loudly about the lack of a jury trial. Which is funny, because if he *really* wanted a jury trial -- nothing, and I mean *nothing* prevented him from instructing his attorneys to 'check the box for a jury trial', file a motion, and argue it.

Quote:And the sad fact is if Trump's attorney did check a box for a jury trial, you'd be sky screaming for them to get disbarred because they attempted to grab a jury trial when it wasnt available.

Trumps attorney, and Trump, has every right to request a jury (by checking the box for a jury in a Note of Issue), and argue for it in a motion.

Any attorney has that right. Any client has that right.

Period. Nice 'whatif' though.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-lawyer-vi...al-1833941

Quote:"But Trump's legal team absolutely could have requested a jury, litigated the issue, and then appealed had they lost," Honig added.

https://www.axios.com/2023/10/04/trump-f...-york-jury

Quote: Trump has claimed it's "unfair" that the judge in the case opted for a bench trial, without a jury. But the court docket shows that while Attorney General Letitia James filed a document requesting a bench trial, Trump's lawyers never filed any corresponding document requesting a jury.

If Trump's team had requested a jury, then Judge Arthur Engoron would have had to consider both sides' requests.

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/...fraud-case

Quote:To get a ruling on the issue, Trump’s lawyers could have filed a jury demand and then litigated their right to one,

https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/10/03/t...check-box/

Quote: As Schoen noted, however, there is no reason why the Trump legal team could not have at least attempted to [request a jury trial], as First American Corporation did in their failed appeal for a jury trial in 2011.

My issues isnt that Habba didnt request a jury triel -- that is clearly a decision for a defendant. My issue is that the defendant's team (and Trump) complained about no jury --- yet never lifted a finger to try and get one. When they could have actually requested it, made a motion, and argued for it.

Water off my back on whether they did or not -- their choice. But it is a choice -- and it is stupid to complain when they *could* have at least tried to get one, since it isnt entirely clear that a jury is available or not under that law.

(10-13-2023 10:22 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 09:39 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-13-2023 09:12 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 09:41 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The AG checking the 'no jury' box isnt the end of it as you seemingly make it to be above.

Only one party needs to 'check the jury box' for a jury trial to be considered. And Allina could have 'checked the jury box', and could have made a motion for it if the judge tossed it. And then nothing prevented her from arguing that motion.

The fact that there was no jury at the outset absolutely means that both sides *chose* non-jury. In that case, either Trump specifically chose to agree to a bench trial, or Habba never talked to her client about it and chose that route herself.

Bummer. Keep digging.

Bummer. Basic Civ Pro.

Its amazing how you keep doubling down on stupid.

We warned you not to fall for a Tom post that talked about the jury box not being checked. But it was anti-Trump, so you swallowed it.

When I presented you with lawyers from NJ, who were no fans of Trump, who said there was no jury trial option for this charge, you instead believed Tom. You didt believe the lawyers who deal with this in NY, you believed Tom.

ANd that doesnt touch the issue of any attorney, and a client (any attorney, any client) can *request* a jury tiral (check the box), make a motion, and argue it.

Just like the judge commented.

Quote:Now that the judge has had to correct his own record, in which he falsely proclaimed Trumps team did not request a jury trial,

Read the above.

Quote:and instead, a jury trial was not available due to the charge, you STILL BELIEVE TOM.

it may not. But again, *nothing* prevents an attorney, or a client (any attorney, any client) from *requesting* the jury trial, making a motion, and arguing that motion that a jury trial is proper. Sometimes a judge will grant that to a limited extent.

The only issue is Trump complaining loudly about the lack of a jury trial. Which is funny, because if he *really* wanted a jury trial -- nothing, and I mean *nothing* prevented him from instructing his attorneys to 'check the box for a jury trial', file a motion, and argue it.

Quote:And the sad fact is if Trump's attorney did check a box for a jury trial, you'd be sky screaming for them to get disbarred because they attempted to grab a jury trial when it wasnt available.

Trumps attorney, and Trump, has every right to check the box for a jury, and argue for it in a motion.

Any attorney has that right. Any client has that right.

Period. Nice 'whatif' though.

You are wrong. The judge said you are wrong. Go reposess grandmas farm or something your menial wit is trained to do

You are wasting electrons.

Engoron added that a checked box as part of a request from Trump's legal team for a jury trial wouldn't have mattered anyway because the relief was equitable.

"It would not have helped to make a motion, nobody forgot to check off a box," Engoron said

(10-13-2023 01:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I do not know whether Donald Trump is guilty or innocent of any crime.

I am fairly certain that those in law enforcement pursuing him are dishonest and biased, and that they have cherry picked similarly dishonest and biased judges to hear their cases.

We have a huge bureaucracy in law enforcement and other areas of government who believe that imposing their will on the populace is more important than doing the will of the people or following our Constitution, and the patRIOT act and its progeny have enabled them like never before. And I see that as the biggest threat, by far, to our democratic republic.

Absolutely well said. Now we have a very large segment of our citizens who have no faith in the judicial system because of this obsession with “getting Trump”. A very bad place to be.

(10-13-2023 02:34 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 11:46 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  Good ole Clarence believes a judge of 20 years can’t be corrupt, knows all and is equal to Solomon. I posit a judge of 20 years is more likely to be dirty. He’s learned what he can get away with and knows who the players are.
But you do you Clarence. Another 50,000 words and you just might convince someone other than Tommy Bois.

Ahhh.... add *another* person who, simply because they make a ruling against your religious icon, *must* be 'corrupt'.

Brilliant deduction there.

And, hate to tell you, the opinion was well within how NY 63(12) rulings are made, and why they are made. Ahhh... but corruption must the answer. Lolz.

And, I will certainly look at a 20+ year jurist in the law a with a lot more gravitas than some bucktooth idiot on a message board, and a lot more gravitas than some asshat when presented with that difference in background in light of the bald determination of how wrong the opinion is, tells another to 'go suck [someone's] dick' simply because his ego is bruised.

You really cannot even write the above as fiction.

Did not make a dent. Bummer.

(10-13-2023 09:12 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 09:41 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 05:18 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-12-2023 04:29 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  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/

The AG checking the 'no jury' box isnt the end of it as you seemingly make it to be above.

Only one party needs to 'check the jury box' for a jury trial to be considered. And Allina could have 'checked the jury box', and could have made a motion for it if the judge tossed it. And then nothing prevented her from arguing that motion.

The fact that there was no jury at the outset absolutely means that both sides *chose* non-jury. In that case, either Trump specifically chose to agree to a bench trial, or Habba never talked to her client about it and chose that route herself.

Bummer. Keep digging.

Bummer. Basic Civ Pro.

I’ll gladly take great pride in receiving the shortest response ever penned by Clarence.

I bet he got a C in civ pro which is why he does transactional work.