All Things Trump: the story continues...

[rainbow]

Wow. Demands. So asking you a question is now a demand.

Apparently. You should see her on gender definitions

[Cunt]

Oh, right. You must be respecting the 'gag'.

Democrat supporters DO love the gag.

So, as usual, no actual answer from you, just bullshit deflection.

You could listen to him, but since he's a practicing lawyer, and not a Trump hater, I'm guessing you won't.

But feel free to make demands, and do some namecalling. It makes you sound authoritative.

Especially when you demand I provide which facts I found 'fun', then when get the predictable dismissal of your juvenile crap, blame me.

As long as you get to keep believing!

Have you got a 'Build Back Better' hat? Have you seen many around?

Wow. Demands. So asking you a question is now a demand.

I was asking about the supposed facts the gag order is suppressing, not Barnes.

And I was implying that you were 'respecting the gag'.

It's a funny way of pointing out that when they TOLD you that you shouldn't know something, you dutifully declined to know it.

I don't know all the things they hid with the gag order, as my sources are biased. Surely yours are too. If you want to know what he was gagged over, you can maybe find out. I've posted some of Trumps comments about it in here (biased) and maybe the court records would have it.

Wow. Demands. So asking you a question is now a demand.

Apparently. You should see her on gender definitions

'Her' who? Are you just trying to be complimentary?

Gender is whatever someone says it is, extrapolated from the most clear definition you could muster.

Or do you narrow it further than that?

As to sex, that's less open to language manipulation, so it causes some conflict of definitions. After you answered 'what is a woman?' with a person with at least one x chromosome, I started thinking you might be confused about your environment, and decided to listen to other researchers instead.

[rasetsu]

Oh, right. You must be respecting the 'gag'.

Democrat supporters DO love the gag.

So, as usual, no actual answer from you, just bullshit deflection.

You could listen to him, but since he's a practicing lawyer, and not a Trump hater, I'm guessing you won't.

But feel free to make demands, and do some namecalling. It makes you sound authoritative.

Especially when you demand I provide which facts I found 'fun', then when get the predictable dismissal of your juvenile crap, blame me.

As long as you get to keep believing!

Have you got a 'Build Back Better' hat? Have you seen many around?

Wow. Demands. So asking you a question is now a demand.

I was asking about the supposed facts the gag order is suppressing, not Barnes.

And I was implying that you were 'respecting the gag'.

It's a funny way of pointing out that when they TOLD you that you shouldn't know something, you dutifully declined to know it.

I don't know all the things they hid with the gag order, as my sources are biased. Surely yours are too. If you want to know what he was gagged over, you can maybe find out. I've posted some of Trumps comments about it in here (biased) and maybe the court records would have it.

You could read it yourself, if you cared about the facts, which you don't.

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-ho ... rcna120642

[Cunt]

You could read it yourself, if you cared about the facts, which you don't.

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-ho ... rcna120642

The webpage at https://iframe.nbcnews.com/qtvg4vC?_showcaption=true might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.

That's what I got at that page.

Their internet might be wonky.

Did you read Trump's section of contract that the judge didn't want allowed into evidence?


You would have if you cared about the facts, which you don't.


https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/16283

This is the Paper that I wanted to submit that the Judge refused to take, because he doesn’t want anybody to know about the Disclaimer Clause at the beginning of each Financial Statement. This is just part of it! That case is a disgrace to the Legal and Judicial System of New York. Hopefully the Appellate Courts will stop this travesty of Justice that everybody is watching and fully understanding!

[rasetsu]

You could read it yourself, if you cared about the facts, which you don't.

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-ho ... rcna120642

The webpage at https://iframe.nbcnews.com/qtvg4vC?_showcaption=true might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.

That's what I got at that page.

Their internet might be wonky.

Did you read Trump's section of contract that the judge didn't want allowed into evidence?


You would have if you cared about the facts, which you don't.


https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/16283

This is the Paper that I wanted to submit that the Judge refused to take, because he doesn’t want anybody to know about the Disclaimer Clause at the beginning of each Financial Statement. This is just part of it! That case is a disgrace to the Legal and Judicial System of New York. Hopefully the Appellate Courts will stop this travesty of Justice that everybody is watching and fully understanding!

Yes, I've read it. If your browser is broken, fix it. Or use google. It's a matter of public record.

Here's a more direct link: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... trumporder

[Cunt]

You could read it yourself, if you cared about the facts, which you don't.

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-ho ... rcna120642

The webpage at https://iframe.nbcnews.com/qtvg4vC?_showcaption=true might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.

That's what I got at that page.

Their internet might be wonky.

Did you read Trump's section of contract that the judge didn't want allowed into evidence?


You would have if you cared about the facts, which you don't.


https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/16283

This is the Paper that I wanted to submit that the Judge refused to take, because he doesn’t want anybody to know about the Disclaimer Clause at the beginning of each Financial Statement. This is just part of it! That case is a disgrace to the Legal and Judicial System of New York. Hopefully the Appellate Courts will stop this travesty of Justice that everybody is watching and fully understanding!

Yes, I've read it. If your browser is broken, fix it. Or use google. It's a matter of public record.

Here's a more direct link: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... trumporder

Thanks.

Why wasn't he allowed to submit that other part? The part about 'Disclaimers Provided to Banks in Each Financial Statement'?

https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/16283

This is the Paper that I wanted to submit that the Judge refused to take, because he doesn’t want anybody to know about the Disclaimer Clause at the beginning of each Financial Statement. This is just part of it! That case is a disgrace to the Legal and Judicial System of New York. Hopefully the Appellate Courts will stop this travesty of Justice that everybody is watching and fully understanding!

Seems the Judge really wants to have a lot hidden. Comfy with topless torso shots, but not with boilerplate from legal agreements about the subject at hand.

[rasetsu]

You could read it yourself, if you cared about the facts, which you don't.

https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-ho ... rcna120642

The webpage at https://iframe.nbcnews.com/qtvg4vC?_showcaption=true might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.

That's what I got at that page.

Their internet might be wonky.

Did you read Trump's section of contract that the judge didn't want allowed into evidence?


You would have if you cared about the facts, which you don't.


https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/16283

This is the Paper that I wanted to submit that the Judge refused to take, because he doesn’t want anybody to know about the Disclaimer Clause at the beginning of each Financial Statement. This is just part of it! That case is a disgrace to the Legal and Judicial System of New York. Hopefully the Appellate Courts will stop this travesty of Justice that everybody is watching and fully understanding!

Yes, I've read it. If your browser is broken, fix it. Or use google. It's a matter of public record.

Here's a more direct link: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... trumporder

Thanks.

Why wasn't he allowed to submit that other part? The part about 'Disclaimers Provided to Banks in Each Financial Statement'?

https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/16283

This is the Paper that I wanted to submit that the Judge refused to take, because he doesn’t want anybody to know about the Disclaimer Clause at the beginning of each Financial Statement. This is just part of it! That case is a disgrace to the Legal and Judicial System of New York. Hopefully the Appellate Courts will stop this travesty of Justice that everybody is watching and fully understanding!

Seems the Judge really wants to have a lot hidden. Comfy with topless torso shots, but not with boilerplate from legal agreements about the subject at hand.

It's already been ruled on.

There’s a small flaw in Trump’s defense: Presiding Judge Arthur Engoron has already dismissed it.

“Defendants’ reliance on these ‘worthless’ disclaimers is worthless,” Engoron wrote in a pretrial ruling dated September 26.

“The ‘worthless clause’ does not say what defendants say it says, does not rise to the level of an enforceable disclaimer, and cannot be used to insulate fraud as to facts peculiarly within defendants’ knowledge, even vis-à-vis sophisticated recipients.”

https://newrepublic.com/post/176680/tru ... raud-trial

The judge isn't hiding anything, he's preventing Trump from reintroducing dead issues.

[rasetsu]

He also, at one point, was asked if he’d received copies of the Trump Organization’s financial statements in 2021. “I was so busy in the White House with China, Russia, and keeping the country safe,” Trump replied.

It fell to Kevin Wallace, a lawyer in the New York attorney general’s office, to remind the former president that he wasn’t in office in 2021.

[Tero]

Trump us a crook. The public knows it. Can't be fixed anymore. The public also knows that Biden is senile. But it does not believe the Ukraine shit about Joe. That was all Trump and Giuliani.

[Tero]

Trump's superpowers:
Declassifying documents just thinking anout them.
Evaluating his properties.
Gleaning from financial documents what they mean by sticking it on his forehead.

[Cunt]

The judge isn't hiding anything, he's preventing Trump from reintroducing dead issues.

Right, so the document that points out that 'users of this financial statement should recognize that...' doesn't get to be part of the discussion of some new users of this financial statement.

Great job! Probably just fine to you that the public official he is forbidden to talk about is in tight with his political allies in the Democratic Party.

They've got him THIS time!

[Joe]

The judge isn't hiding anything, he's preventing Trump from reintroducing dead issues.

Right, so the document that points out that 'users of this financial statement should recognize that...' doesn't get to be part of the discussion of some new users of this financial statement.

Great job! Probably just fine to you that the public official he is forbidden to talk about is in tight with his political allies in the Democratic Party.

They've got him THIS time!

Gee Cunt, the link rasetsu provided lays out the judge's reasoning. It would be more convincing to point out where that was wrong instead of spewing ad-homs.

Unless you're just trolling, in which case carry on.

[Cunt]

The judge isn't hiding anything, he's preventing Trump from reintroducing dead issues.

Right, so the document that points out that 'users of this financial statement should recognize that...' doesn't get to be part of the discussion of some new users of this financial statement.

Great job! Probably just fine to you that the public official he is forbidden to talk about is in tight with his political allies in the Democratic Party.

They've got him THIS time!

Gee Cunt, the link rasetsu provided lays out the judge's reasoning. It would be more convincing to point out where that was wrong instead of spewing ad-homs.

Unless you're just trolling, in which case carry on.

Not trolling, just pointing out that unless you simply and blindly believe every judge, you have to wonder why he is gagged from pointing out the political bias of the clerk and other public officials handling the case.

If you ARE believing every judge, do tell me about the Rittenhouse case, and if you agree with me that it was one of the most clear cases of self defense on record, or if you think the judge was somehow slightly beneath 'above reproach'?

I don't see the ad-homs either, unless you are one who DID think it was fine to hide political bias in the public servants involved in this particular case. I don't really think anyone believes that though. It makes a convenient excuse for those who want to believe this judge. I understand it, I mean, he has a GREAT physique, and is a democrat supporter.

[Cunt]

Very brave judge. Judicial bravery. Fortunate he has a champion to defend him while gagged by his own decorum.

https://thepostmillennial.com/wife-of-n ... aign=64483

It has been revealed that the wife of the judge overseeing the civil case against Donald Trump in New York has been attacking the former president and his lawyer on social media.

Dawn Marie Engoron's posts came just days after her husband, Arthur, expanded a gag order against Trump and his legal team in order to prevent them from speaking publicly against anyone involved in the case.

[Joe]

The judge isn't hiding anything, he's preventing Trump from reintroducing dead issues.

Right, so the document that points out that 'users of this financial statement should recognize that...' doesn't get to be part of the discussion of some new users of this financial statement.

Great job! Probably just fine to you that the public official he is forbidden to talk about is in tight with his political allies in the Democratic Party.

They've got him THIS time!

Gee Cunt, the link rasetsu provided lays out the judge's reasoning. It would be more convincing to point out where that was wrong instead of spewing ad-homs.

Unless you're just trolling, in which case carry on.

Not trolling, just pointing out that unless you simply and blindly believe every judge, you have to wonder why he is gagged from pointing out the political bias of the clerk and other public officials handling the case.

If you ARE believing every judge, do tell me about the Rittenhouse case, and if you agree with me that it was one of the most clear cases of self defense on record, or if you think the judge was somehow slightly beneath 'above reproach'?

I don't see the ad-homs either, unless you are one who DID think it was fine to hide political bias in the public servants involved in this particular case. I don't really think anyone believes that though. It makes a convenient excuse for those who want to believe this judge. I understand it, I mean, he has a GREAT physique, and is a democrat supporter.

Geez Cunt, don't you know anything about the courts? It doesn't matter whether you believe the judge or not. He ruled and that's that, unless a higher court overturns the ruling. Plus, he wrote down why so the public and higher courts can evaluate his reasoning.

Which brings me to the ad-homs. Did you read the judge's opinion and address why you think he's wrong? Of course not, you accused him of bias and being a democratic supporter, which is an ad-hom argument.

You should just say you're trolling. It makes more sense that way.