Update on Trump Legal Cases

[silverscreenselect]

Any questioning of the official swamp produced narrative disseminated by the state-run mainstream media is immediately (we have our own quick response troll) met by derision, 'debunking' by partisan 'experts', labeling and ad hominem attacks. Not by any rational argument or debate.

Your "questionings" are immediately debunked because they are pure bunk, worthy of derision. And if the ad hominem fits, wear it. For most people, "rational argument" means assembling facts that prove your contention of disprove the other person's. That's what I do. That's what the mainstream media does. You don't like that so you dismiss it because anyone who presents contrary facts (which usually means anyone with any knowledge of the subject other than a coroner in Alabama) is dismissed as partisan. You can't have a rational argument with someone who refuses to be rational.

[flockofseagulls104]

Any questioning of the official swamp produced narrative disseminated by the state-run mainstream media is immediately (we have our own quick response troll) met by derision, 'debunking' by partisan 'experts', labeling and ad hominem attacks.

Your "questionings" are immediately debunked because they are pure bunk, worthy of derision. And if the ad hominem fits, wear it.

Right on time with the usual.

[wbtravis007]

No, that's how you work. You don't like the facts, and you deny them because the Democrats, the liberals, the doctors, the scientists, the press, and anyone else you don't like is manipulating or inventing them for their own sinister purposes. So far, they've charged over 1000 people in the January 6 insurrection and convicted or gotten guilty pleas from over 700 of them. Not to mention the dozens of witnesses who testified under oath at the hearings and the various trials. And the hours of footage that have been shown depicting hundreds of rioters. That's a whole heck of a lot of inventing and manipulating. Meanwhile, you, Trump, and Dennis Prager can't produce a single very fine person at the Charlottesville riot or enough evidence to win any of those 60 court cases after the 2020 election.

"You don't like facts.."

"iTs nOt HunTeRs LaPTop."
Ignore the many Suspicious Activity Reports

Your current favorite leg to hump (besides Flock) - aka the President, is guilty of, at the very least, bribery and money laundering, for starters. Buckle up, buttercup.

I have said many times, and I believe it to be true, that this bored is a microcosm of what is happening out in the real world. Any questioning of the official swamp produced narrative disseminated by the state-run mainstream media is immediately (we have our own quick response troll) met by derision, 'debunking' by partisan 'experts', labeling and ad hominem attacks. Not by any rational argument or debate. And I think I am the 'Trump' of this bored. I get it from all the lefties, because I don't take their crap, and I give it back from time to time. I wonder if Trump keeps a signature page of the ridiculous things he has been accused of and ignorant epithets that are thrown at him. I'm sure it's a lot longer than mine. But he gets a lot more exposure than I do.

You weird.

And you wonder whether Trump keeps a signature page of the ridiculous things he has been accused of.

Chortle.

[flockofseagulls104]

You weird.

Ok, I added it. Not sure why I hadn't added it a long time ago.

[Bob78164]

Jack Smith has asked the Supreme Court to bypass the intermediate appellate courts and immediately take up the question of whether Donny is absolutely immune from prosecution for anything he may have done prior to January 20, 2021. The Court has asked Donny's lawyers to file their response to that request by December 20. The response for a request is a clear indication that they're taking the request seriously -- requests to bypass the intermediate appellate courts are highly unusual and the Supreme Court could have summarily denied the motion without awaiting a response. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

https://ak2.rmbl.ws/s8/2/N/k/K/z/NkKzo. ... =1&u=ummtf

Of course, this is not evidence. We cannot be trusted to believe what we see and hear with our own eyes and ears. We must look to the lefties on this bored to tell us what is really true.

The same, exact thing with Fani Willis.

Jack Smith is trying to do an end-run around the legal process to deprive his enemy of due process just so he can keep the schedule of trials against trump on track. The appeal would take too long, so he's trying to get around it.

When are you people going to wake up? You let this lawfare shit be successful, sooner or later it's going to be used against all of us.

One example: You went from Hunter's laptop being a Russian-manufactured lie to now clinging to 'there's no evidence' that the big guy was involved. When you KNOW that is the only reason Hunter could have been involved in any of these high-dollar foreign deals. When will your blinders come off? Are you really that stupid?

These corrupt swamp creatures are now willing to do ANYTHING to eliminate the threat of trump getting back in the White House. And I mean anything. Because it's now not only political, but they know that if he does, they will be held personally accountable for their actions. It's now self preservation.

IMO the ONLY way to clean this situation up, which was planned and executed by the democrats and the left, is to get trump back in the white house. It will be painful, but don't blame him. Put the blame where it belongs, the swamp. And it needs to be cleansed.

[silverscreenselect]

One example: You went from Hunter's laptop being a Russian-manufactured lie to now clinging to 'there's no evidence' that the big guy was involved. When you KNOW that is the only reason Hunter could have been involved in any of these high-dollar foreign deals. When will your blinders come off? Are you really that stupid?

"Knowing" that Joe Biden was involved in Hunter's foreign deals is not the same as having evidence he was involved. Which neither you nor the House Republicans have now or have ever had.

As to the laptop, there is still no evidence, other than Rudy Giuliani's word, that what he has been passing around is a full and accurate copy of what was on a laptop Hunter Biden left at the computer shop. There are certainly some things that came from Hunter Biden, but that doesn't mean the entire hard drive in Rudy's possession wasn't doctored with. As to where that originated, Russia is still a good guess.

And the Supreme Court is the highest authority in the land to rule on Trump's claims. His attorneys can make all the arguments they want there. And you know as well as I do that when Trump's claims got rejected by the Court of Appeals, he was going to the Supreme Court anyway.

[silverscreenselect]

Rudy Giuliani's damages trial is taking place this week in DC. The court already entered a default judgment that Rudy defamed Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss with his accusations after the 2020 election. Now, the women's attorneys are seeking up to $43 million in damages. It will be good to see them take that slimy weasel for every penny he's made from representing Trump and others in the past. It will be better to see him spend the rest of his days in a Georgia prison, along with his good buddy Donald Trump.

[flockofseagulls104]

One example: You went from Hunter's laptop being a Russian-manufactured lie to now clinging to 'there's no evidence' that the big guy was involved. When you KNOW that is the only reason Hunter could have been involved in any of these high-dollar foreign deals. When will your blinders come off? Are you really that stupid?

"Knowing" that Joe Biden was involved in Hunter's foreign deals is not the same as having evidence he was involved. Which neither you nor the House Republicans have now or have ever had.

As to the laptop, there is still no evidence, other than Rudy Giuliani's word, that what he has been passing around is a full and accurate copy of what was on a laptop Hunter Biden left at the computer shop. There are certainly some things that came from Hunter Biden, but that doesn't mean the entire hard drive in Rudy's possession wasn't doctored with. As to where that originated, Russia is still a good guess.

And the Supreme Court is the highest authority in the land to rule on Trump's claims. His attorneys can make all the arguments they want there. And you know as well as I do that when Trump's claims got rejected by the Court of Appeals, he was going to the Supreme Court anyway.

Yes, you are that stupid. Still clinging. And, I noticed you avoided the Leticia James video completely. Please go and find some leftist internet expert's quote on that subject to assuage your internal hypocrisy.

[flockofseagulls104]

BTW you want more evidence that the Leticia James crap is just that?

Here is the zillow listing for a vacant lot of trees just down the street from Mar A Lago

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1980 ... 3791_zpid/

James and Engoron are insanely claiming that MarALago is worth 18 million.

Yet not one bank, financial institution or anyone else has sued, claimed fraud or is even unhappy with any of the deals that are under consideration in that courtroom. There are no victims. Just a prosection over nothing.

This is blatant election interference to anyone with any brain.

[silverscreenselect]

BTW you want more evidence that the Leticia James crap is just that?

Here is the zillow listing for a vacant lot of trees just down the street from Mar A Lago

Flock, your Zillow listing has been up for over 500 days. Obviously, no one wants to pay that kind of money for a vacant lot. And the property was assessed in 2022 at $4.4 million. That same tax assessor valued Maralago at $18 to $27 million, a far cry from the $425+ million Trump claimed. The reason the valuation for Maralago is so low is because it is considered a historic property (owned by the Posts before Trump) and cannot be subdivided or used for anything other than a private club and is subject to a lot of preservation expenses. So the property can't be renovated or subdivided or have new construction. Indeed, it's questionable whether Trump has the legal right to live there under the deed. I'm sure the Palm Beach County tax assessor would love to get their hands on $500 million worth of property taxes on Maralago, but they can't because the fair market value of the property, which is determined by what Trump could get for selling it, is $18 to $27 million.

If you or I did what Trump did and filed fraudulent financial documents to get better loan terms, we'd be in jail right now. It doesn't matter if Trump didn't default or not. According to a trial witness, the banks lost out on over $168 million in interest as a result of Trump's fraudulent statements.

[flockofseagulls104]

BTW you want more evidence that the Leticia James crap is just that?

Here is the zillow listing for a vacant lot of trees just down the street from Mar A Lago

Flock, your Zillow listing has been up for over 500 days. Obviously, no one wants to pay that kind of money for a vacant lot. And the property was assessed in 2022 at $4.4 million. That same tax assessor valued Maralago at $18 to $27 million, a far cry from the $425+ million Trump claimed. The reason the valuation for Maralago is so low is because it is considered a historic property (owned by the Posts before Trump) and cannot be subdivided or used for anything other than a private club and is subject to a lot of preservation expenses. So the property can't be renovated or subdivided or have new construction. Indeed, it's questionable whether Trump has the legal right to live there under the deed. I'm sure the Palm Beach County tax assessor would love to get their hands on $500 million worth of property taxes on Maralago, but they can't because the fair market value of the property, which is determined by what Trump could get for selling it, is $18 to $27 million.

If you or I did what Trump did and filed fraudulent financial documents to get better loan terms, we'd be in jail right now. It doesn't matter if Trump didn't default or not. According to a trial witness, the banks lost out on over $168 million in interest as a result of Trump's fraudulent statements.

Um, no we wouldn't. Because NO ONE SUED HIM. And they were free to value it however they wanted. The banks set the interest rate, not Trump. That's their business. not Engoron's, who said '"I decided these were ill-gotten [gains]"

The 2 acre vacant lot was assessed at $4.4 million? Perhaps because trees are not as valuable as a 20 acre luxury resort with a golf course, restaurant facilities, boutiques and being a world-famous historic landmark.

Keep being insane. It is funny.

[silverscreenselect]

The 2 acre vacant lot was assessed at $4.4 million? Perhaps because trees are not as valuable as a 20 acre luxury resort with a golf course, restaurant facilities, boutiques and being a world-famous historic landmark.

And again, you show yet another thing you know nothing about.

Trump's financial statements were supposed to show the fair market value of his assets. That's the value that Trump could get if he sold the property or if the banks had to foreclose on it and sell it. And that property could only be run as a private club, could not be subdivided or renovated, and was subject to numerous other restrictions and ongoing preservation expenses. So, any buyer would be taking a flyer on whether they could make it work as an increasingly out-of-date private club without Trump's name (and presence) attached to it.

[flockofseagulls104]

The 2 acre vacant lot was assessed at $4.4 million? Perhaps because trees are not as valuable as a 20 acre luxury resort with a golf course, restaurant facilities, boutiques and being a world-famous historic landmark.

And again, you show yet another thing you know nothing about.

Trump's financial statements were supposed to show the fair market value of his assets. That's the value that Trump could get if he sold the property or if the banks had to foreclose on it and sell it. And that property could only be run as a private club, could not be subdivided or renovated, and was subject to numerous other restrictions and ongoing preservation expenses. So, any buyer would be taking a flyer on whether they could make it work as an increasingly out-of-date private club without Trump's name (and presence) attached to it.

Well anyone in the world with 18 million would buy it in a heartbeat. I would. If I had 18 million. Anyone on the bored want to go in on it with me? Look on zillow or redfin at the individual private homes right next to it. I don't think any of them have 118 rooms in them. From what I can see, it's got 500 members and at $20,000 a year membership fee, that's 10 million right there. But continue your insanity. Instead of arguing and abuse, maybe you should graduate into getting hit on the head lessons. Maybe it would knock some sense into you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLlv_aZjHXc

[silverscreenselect]

Well anyone in the world with 18 million would buy it in a heartbeat.

You can't compare Maralago to private homes because no buyer could use it as a private home. Here's from an AP article:

The county gives Mar-a-Lago its current value for taxation of $37 million based on its annual net operating income as a club and not on its resale value as a home or its reconstruction cost. It is one of nine private clubs in the county taxed that way. Becky Robinson, the tax assessor’s spokesperson, said that method is used because private clubs are so rarely sold or built, making it impossible to set their tax rates by comparing them to similar properties. Mar-a-Lago’s property tax bill will be $602,000 this year, county records show.

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz, a South Florida Democrat, wrote the county saying if Trump claims Mar-a-Lago is worth $1 billion, he should be taxed accordingly. If Mar-a-Lago had a $1 billion assessed value, it’s property tax bill would be approximately $18 million. Robinson said the county bases its assessments on the law and its formulas, not the value owners claim. In her lawsuit against Trump, New York Attorney General Letitia James argued that Mar-a-Lago was one of multiple assets Trump overvalued in financial statements given to banks and others.

On those statements, Trump valued Mar-a-Lago as high as $739 million — a figure James said ignored deed restrictions requiring the property to be used as a social club — not a private home. Her lawyers have argued that in his financial statements, Trump should have valued Mar-a-Lago the same way the county does, based on its club status. Trump’s financial statements, the New York lawyers wrote, valued the club “based on the false and misleading premise that it was an unrestricted residential plot of land that could be sold and used as a private home, which was clearly not the case.”

Trump's accountants evaluated Maralago on its value as a private home. The county determined it based on the annual NET operating income as a club, after you subtract all the expenses, and there are considerable expenses in maintaining a club like that especially with the historic preservation costs. Plus, Maralago's value as a club would diminish over time because of the restrictions on renovations and improvements. And to be blunt, much of Maralago's value was based on the proximity of members to Donald Trump. The current appraisal is $33.4 million. A future owner wouldn't have that lure. Property tax assessments of value tend to be low, but not by 20 or more times the assessed value of the property.

Plus, Flock's statement that anyone with $18 million would buy Maralago in a heartbeat indicates that that's a good estimate of the fair market value of the property. It's what a willing buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would sell it for. The question isn't whether you would pay $18 or $33 million (the actual 2023 appraisal) for Maralago but rather the $500 to $700 million Trump claims it's worth. Apparently, Maralago generates about $20 million in income a year, and profit margins for country clubs run 10-15% at best. So given the best possible numbers, Trump''s profit from Maralago was in the $3 to $4 million range. Investors generally shoot for at least a 10% return on investment when buying a business, so the $33 million appraised value makes sense. A $700 million purchase price for Maralago to generate at best $4 million in net profits makes no financial sense.

[flockofseagulls104]

Well anyone in the world with 18 million would buy it in a heartbeat.

You can't compare Maralago to private homes because no buyer could use it as a private home. Here's from an AP article:

The county gives Mar-a-Lago its current value for taxation of $37 million based on its annual net operating income as a club and not on its resale value as a home or its reconstruction cost. It is one of nine private clubs in the county taxed that way. Becky Robinson, the tax assessor’s spokesperson, said that method is used because private clubs are so rarely sold or built, making it impossible to set their tax rates by comparing them to similar properties. Mar-a-Lago’s property tax bill will be $602,000 this year, county records show.

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz, a South Florida Democrat, wrote the county saying if Trump claims Mar-a-Lago is worth $1 billion, he should be taxed accordingly. If Mar-a-Lago had a $1 billion assessed value, it’s property tax bill would be approximately $18 million. Robinson said the county bases its assessments on the law and its formulas, not the value owners claim. In her lawsuit against Trump, New York Attorney General Letitia James argued that Mar-a-Lago was one of multiple assets Trump overvalued in financial statements given to banks and others.

On those statements, Trump valued Mar-a-Lago as high as $739 million — a figure James said ignored deed restrictions requiring the property to be used as a social club — not a private home. Her lawyers have argued that in his financial statements, Trump should have valued Mar-a-Lago the same way the county does, based on its club status. Trump’s financial statements, the New York lawyers wrote, valued the club “based on the false and misleading premise that it was an unrestricted residential plot of land that could be sold and used as a private home, which was clearly not the case.”

Trump's accountants evaluated Maralago on its value as a private home. The county determined it based on the annual NET operating income as a club, after you subtract all the expenses, and there are considerable expenses in maintaining a club like that especially with the historic preservation costs. Plus, Maralago's value as a club would diminish over time because of the restrictions on renovations and improvements. And to be blunt, much of Maralago's value was based on the proximity of members to Donald Trump. The current appraisal is $33.4 million. A future owner wouldn't have that lure. Property tax assessments of value tend to be low, but not by 20 or more times the assessed value of the property.

Plus, Flock's statement that anyone with $18 million would buy Maralago in a heartbeat indicates that that's a good estimate of the fair market value of the property. It's what a willing buyer would pay for the property and a willing seller would sell it for. The question isn't whether you would pay $18 or $33 million (the actual 2023 appraisal) for Maralago but rather the $500 to $700 million Trump claims it's worth. Apparently, Maralago generates about $20 million in income a year, and profit margins for country clubs run 10-15% at best. So given the best possible numbers, Trump''s profit from Maralago was in the $3 to $4 million range. Investors generally shoot for at least a 10% return on investment when buying a business, so the $33 million appraised value makes sense. A $700 million purchase price for Maralago to generate at best $4 million in net profits makes no financial sense.

This is exactly why lawyers are the bane of our existence. The simple fact is that trump was not trying to sell Mar-a-Lago. He was applying for loans with banks. It was between him and the bank. If the banks had a problem with it, they had recourse. They could refuse the loan. They could set the interest rate to whatever they wanted. They could sue him. But they didn't, pure and simple. Banks are not defenseless children that need Leticia James and Judge Engoron to protect them. They gave him the loans at an agreed-upon interest rate, and they were happy to do so and happy with the result. James had no business sticking her nose in it. NONE. That is a pure example of government overreach. And just the start of it, if they get away with it. I am sure if she gave the same scrutiny to any other random person who didn't happen to be running for president, she would be very, very busy. Or maybe going after regular, actual criminals.

Again, you ignore the main point and argue bullshit about minutia. I guess that's what they teach at Acme Law School for Morons.

[silverscreenselect]

The simple fact is that trump was not trying to sell Mar-a-Lago. He was applying for loans with banks. It was between him and the bank. If the banks had a problem with it, they had recourse. They could refuse the loan. They could set the interest rate to whatever they wanted. They could sue him. But they didn't, pure and simple. Banks are not defenseless children that need Leticia James and Judge Engoron to protect them. They gave him the loans at an agreed-upon interest rate, and they were happy to do so and happy with the result.

The simple fact is that Trump committed fraud on his financial statements that the banks relied on in setting the interest rates. The facts that the banks made money is irrelevant. The fact that the banks didn't sue Trump is irrelevant. Trump saved over $150 million through his fraud. Every honest borrower or would-be borrower paid a higher interest rate because they didn't fudge the books like Trump did. If you or I did what Trump did, we'd probably be in jail right now. If every commercial borrower did what Trump did and got away with it, some of them would default, and the bank wouldn't have enough in risk premiums to cover those losses.

[silverscreenselect]

A case of a Jan 6 rioter has reached the Supreme Court and may have implications for everyone charged with obstruction of justice in the matter including Donald Trump.Joseph Fischer was charged with obstruction of justice under a federal statute that makes it a crime to "otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding,” The question is what the government is required to prove in this case. According to the Court of Appeals, if it's proved that Fischer intended to affect the cerification of the election, then a wide range of conduct is prohibited. The district court threw out that charge against Fischer, saying that the government had to prove that he had taken “some action with respect to a document, record or other object” to obstruct an official proceeding under the law. The Court of Appeals reversed, saying that the statute applied to all actions taken by a defendant to impede a proceeding, not just those involving documents.

Over 300 January 6 defendants have been charged with obstruction of justice and 150 of them pled guilty or were convicted. One of the counts against Trump involves obstruction of justice under this same statute.

[flockofseagulls104]

The simple fact is that trump was not trying to sell Mar-a-Lago. He was applying for loans with banks. It was between him and the bank. If the banks had a problem with it, they had recourse. They could refuse the loan. They could set the interest rate to whatever they wanted. They could sue him. But they didn't, pure and simple. Banks are not defenseless children that need Leticia James and Judge Engoron to protect them. They gave him the loans at an agreed-upon interest rate, and they were happy to do so and happy with the result.

The simple fact is that Trump committed fraud on his financial statements that the banks relied on in setting the interest rates. The facts that the banks made money is irrelevant. The fact that the banks didn't sue Trump is irrelevant. Trump saved over $150 million through his fraud. Every honest borrower or would-be borrower paid a higher interest rate because they didn't fudge the books like Trump did. If you or I did what Trump did, we'd probably be in jail right now. If every commercial borrower did what Trump did and got away with it, some of them would default, and the bank wouldn't have enough in risk premiums to cover those losses.

Where's your evidence for your 'simple fact'? I've provided mine. The facts are that Trump applied for a loan. His ACCOUNTANTS made an estimate of value for his collateral. The banks did their due diligence. They had full right to establish their own idea of the collateral's value. That has been established and the banks confirmed it. They'd be out of business if they didn't. They granted the loans at the interest rate they were comfortable with, and trump paid back every penny. If trump defaulted on the loan, they would take Mar-A-Lago at THEIR estimate of its value and go forward with it. They accepted that risk, did they not? WHERE'S THE FUCKING CRIME, moron? No one was hurt. Except for democrats who have made it their life mission to bring down this one individual. Keep clinging to your TDS delusions. It will be so satisfying when and if trump gets back to the White House to see you melt down.

[silverscreenselect]

WHERE'S THE FUCKING CRIME, moron? No one was hurt.

Trump saved $180 million. The evidence showed that although the accountants prepared the documents, they did so under his direction, and he told them when their estimates were too high or too low, and he reviewed and signed off on the documents. That evidence was enough to convince the judge to rule against Trump as a matter of law. That now makes 61 courts that haven't believed Trump's claims, 62 if you count E. Jean Carroll's defamation verdict. Your theory apparently is that since banks have plenty of money, they can afford to be defrauded out of $180 million. What's the difference between what Trump did and some cybercriminal draining $180 million out of the bank? Nobody got hurt.

The next time you apply for a loan somewhere, try doing what Trump did and see what happens.

[flockofseagulls104]

WHERE'S THE FUCKING CRIME, moron? No one was hurt.

Trump saved $180 million. The evidence showed that although the accountants prepared the documents, they did so under his direction, and he told them when their estimates were too high or too low, and he reviewed and signed off on the documents. That evidence was enough to convince the judge to rule against Trump as a matter of law. That now makes 61 courts that haven't believed Trump's claims, 62 if you count E. Jean Carroll's defamation verdict. Your theory apparently is that since banks have plenty of money, they can afford to be defrauded out of $180 million. What's the difference between what Trump did and some cybercriminal draining $180 million out of the bank? Nobody got hurt.

The next time you apply for a loan somewhere, try doing what Trump did and see what happens.

I see no evidence. Just more insane jibber jabber from you. So now I guess whatever big accounting firm is too stupid to protect themselves from evil trump now too? They need big bad Leticia James to protect them from themselves? She must know everything about everything, just like you. Never mind that she campaigned on bringing him down. I think that is indisputable EVIDENCE. Where is your evidence? All this time, you have completely ignored that and made stupid arguments about the value of Mar-A-Lago as a house. It ain't a house. And he wasn't selling it. If he was selling it, that is the value he put on it and probably what he would ask for it. It was up to the banks to decide what THEY thought they could get for it if he defaulted on the loan. Not what Engoron would pay for it.
And the judge forgot to gag his wife until someone noticed all the shit she had posted. Then he got it taken down, but he can sure gag trump.

I wouldn't get the loan. That's all that would happen. My opinion against theirs. Keep clinging.

[silverscreenselect]

Where is your evidence? All this time, you have completely ignored that and made stupid arguments about the value of Mar-A-Lago as a house.

The evidence is the false financial statements. The banks testified that they relied on those statements in setting the loan terms. That's fraud. Donald Trump made $168 million by preparing fraudulent documents that the banks relied on. Accounting experts, not Judge Engoron, testified about the contents of the financial statements, including but not limited to Maralago. The outside accountants prepared the statements based on the information that Trump gave them. His company provided all the information to the accountants that they used to construct the statements. Trump supervised the preparation of the returns and directed his own accountants to change the values of what they were submitting to suit his needs at the time. High valuations for loan applications; low valuations for taxes. There were weeks of testimony in this case. That's evidence. You reject it, not because of any superior knowledge of the law, rules of evidence, or accounting principles, but because Donald Trump told you he did nothing wrong. If Newsmax ever gets its version of Trump Court TV, you'd make a great attorney there. But in the real world, many courts keep unanimously rejecting yours and Trump's arguments. Trump couldn't ask for a better useful tool than you.

[flockofseagulls104]

We'll see what happens after Tue and Wed. There is much real evidence, but evidence is ignored by the people protected by the 'Big Lie' lie, just like trollboy does. Pretty sure the media will ignore it.

[silverscreenselect]

We'll see what happens after Tue and Wed. There is much real evidence, but evidence is ignored by the people protected by the 'Big Lie' lie, just like trollboy does. Pretty sure the media will ignore it.

I'm not sure what Tuesday and Wednesday have to do with anything since the House has closed up shop until January. And, by the way, Comer and Jordan talking about what they're going to find (which they do a lot) isn't the same as finding actual evidence.

[flockofseagulls104]

We'll see what happens after Tue and Wed. There is much real evidence, but evidence is ignored by the people protected by the 'Big Lie' lie, just like trollboy does. Pretty sure the media will ignore it.

I'm not sure what Tuesday and Wednesday have to do with anything since the House has closed up shop until January. And, by the way, Comer and Jordan talking about what they're going to find (which they do a lot) isn't the same as finding actual evidence.

I dIdn't think you would. Just confirms what I already know. You know nothing but what you are told to see.