OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Gronk]

So continuing with the "mail votes are shonky" theme, he plans to claim victory early and then dispute the validity of any swing against him as postal votes are counted ? Fascinating stuff.

 

[hindy111]

I've already made my bet, mate, and I already owe a round from earlier this year. So, sorry, but not gonna take you up on that.

I'll lay down $200. You lay down $120.

 

[Gronk]

So continuing with the "mail votes are shonky" theme, he plans to claim victory early and then dispute the validity of any swing against him as postal votes are counted ? Fascinating stuff.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I reckon he’ll win.

 

[Gronk]

I reckon he’ll win.

I have no idea either way. I'll miss him in some sort of weird masochistic way if he loses. Must be the part of me that likes reality TV. Or train wrecks. The unraveling of society live, starring Mr Magoo.

 

[TheRam]

You’ve lost the plot.

I consistently pointed out that both Trump and Biden are dodgy and somehow this has now descended into you trying to tell me that I am a lefty.

I’m the words of Andrew Neil to Ben Shapiro “If only you knew how ridiculous that statement is, you wouldn’t have said it”.

Do you honestly think you are making any sense? Both Trump and Biden are dodgy. There’s plenty of evidence on both of you care to expand your mind.

Where's the stuff on Trump is all I'm saying? Not some other guys opinion without any hard evidence.

Show me and the rest of the world what millions of screaming fools haven't been able to do please. Accusations without evidence in politics, especially American, is part of their makeup. It is the way to sow the seed of doubt about your opponent and hopefully discredit them enough for the other side to win.

But is Trump's case none of it has stuck because they couldn't back it up and because all the lefties came out of the gate hating on him so everyone that supported him saw through it immediately.

Then when he got elected people started to see his achievements and his ability to cut through all the political red tape and do things that actually helped peoples lives and wasn't just doing the normal political spin while things were actually getting worse for them. Consequentially the ridiculous over the top bias and stich up jobs that ensued from all his opponents actually helped even more who were benefactors of his policies to make the decision to jump on the Trump train.

You on the other hand pretend that there is actual evidence of Trump corruption and say you hate on both sides. Well that is just ignorant or just sly since there isn't any real evidence.

So what is it are you just terribly informed or are you just a sly pretender that actually is hating on Trump but hiding behind a fake neutrality persona? Since you are generally well informed on most things, I think we all know the answer.

 

[TheRam]

But somehow you keep insisting that I must respond to yours?

The reason it failed was because everyone could see it was plain and simple partisan politics with the exception of one disgruntled Republican.

Again no evidence mate. Show me evidence. How hard could it be if we have the worst and most heinous American President currently sitting in the Oval Office?

You should be able to point a laundry list of undisputable crimes that I would instantly feel the need to be a hater too.

 

[Twizzle]

oh, he's squeaky clean


Exclusive: Trump's 3,500 lawsuits unprecedented for a presidential nominee
Nick Penzenstadler, and Susan Page
USA TODAY

Donald Trump is a fighter, famous for legal skirmishes over everything from his golf courses to his tax bills to Trump University. But until now, it hasn’t been clear precisely how litigious he is and what that might portend for a Trump presidency.

An exclusive USA TODAY analysis of legal filings across the United States finds that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee and his businesses have been involved in at least 3,500 legal actions in federal and state courts during the past three decades. They range from skirmishes with casino patrons to million-dollar real estate suits to personal defamation lawsuits.

The sheer volume of lawsuits is unprecedented for a presidential nominee. No candidate of a major party has had anything approaching the number of Trump’s courtroom entanglements.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/

 

[Twizzle]

Trump and his 3,500 suits: Prosecutor and author reveals in interview his portrait of 'Plaintiff in Chief'
BY ROBIN LINDLEY

APRIL 20, 2020, 8:49 AM CDT

• 
  While Donald Trump had no experience in working in government or in public service when he became president of the United States, he brought an astounding history of involvement in thousands of lawsuits to the nation’s highest office. Former federal prosecutor and author James D. Zirin illuminates more than 45 years of Trump’s legal disputes in his new book, Plaintiff in Chief: A Portrait of Donald Trump in 3,500 Lawsuits, published in September 2019.
  
  As a federal prosecutor, Zirin spent decades handling complex litigation. He’s also a self-described “middle-of-the-road Republican.” Plaintiff in Chief is not a partisan screed but a carefully documented legal study.
  
  In his book, Zirin scrupulously details Trump’s life in courts of law. Based on more than three years of extensive research, the book examines illustrative cases and how they reflect on the character and moral perspective of the current president. Zirin references page after page of court records and other evidence to illustrate Trump’s legal maneuvering.
  
  As Zirin points out, Trump learned how to use the law from his mentor, notorious lawyer Roy Cohn. Trump took Cohn’s scorched-earth strategy to heart.
  
  “Trump saw litigation as being only about winning,” Zirin writes. “He sued at the drop of a hat. He sued for sport; he sued to achieve control; and he sued to make a point. He sued as a means of destroying or silencing those who crossed him. He became a plaintiff in chief.”
  
  Zirin argues that Trump has shown a chronic scorn for the law. “All this aberrant behavior would be problematic in a businessman,” he writes. “But the implications of such conduct in a man who is the president of the United States are nothing less than terrifying.”
  
  Zirin is an accomplished litigator who has appeared in federal and state courts around the nation. He was an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York under then-U.S. Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau.
  
  His other books include Supremely Partisan: How Raw Politics Tips the Scales in the United States Supreme Court and The Mother Court: Tales of Cases That Mattered in America’s Greatest Trial Court. His articles have appeared in array of publications.
  
  Zirin recently answered some questions—from Robin Lindley, a Seattle-based writer and lawyer—on his study of Trump, by telephone from his office in New York.

https://www.abajournal.com/web/arti...-donald-trump-through-more-than-3500-lawsuits

 

[Gary Gutful]

Where's the stuff on Trump is all I'm saying? Not some other guys opinion without any hard evidence.

Show me and the rest of the world what millions of screaming fools haven't been able to do please. Accusations without evidence in politics, especially American, is part of their makeup. It is the way to sow the seed of doubt about your opponent and hopefully discredit them enough for the other side to win.

But is Trump's case none of it has stuck because they couldn't back it up and because all the lefties came out of the gate hating on him so everyone that supported him saw through it immediately.

Then when he got elected people started to see his achievements and his ability to cut through all the political red tape and do things that actually helped peoples lives and wasn't just doing the normal political spin while things were actually getting worse for them. Consequentially the ridiculous over the top bias and stich up jobs that ensued from all his opponents actually helped even more who were benefactors of his policies to make the decision to jump on the Trump train.

You on the other hand pretend that there is actual evidence of Trump corruption and say you hate on both sides. Well that is just ignorant or just sly since there isn't any real evidence.

So what is it are you just terribly informed or are you just a sly pretender that actually is hating on Trump but hiding behind a fake neutrality persona? Since you are generally well informed on most things, I think we all know the answer.

You have well and truly soiled yourself over this one.

I just said that Trump and Biden are dodgy mate. Why do you keep chasing me on Trump?

I don’t need to provide you with reams of evidence regarding Trump. There is lots of shit online about how he wanted to hire his daughter as VP, his pretend Christianity, his constant lying (the best one recently was how he told Michigan that he was their ‘man of the year’ despite there being no such award) and then there is this uncomfortable ‘blurring of the boundaries’ between Trump the businessman and Trump the President. His businesses have undoubtedly benefitted in ways they didn’t previously.

Biden is dodgy too. He has bullshitted people on a few key policy items. His work on the Bankruptcy Bill smacked of dodgy favours from big banks. He has been bankrolled in the past by healthcare lobbyists and he arsef**ked the mining sector over climate policy. And there is definitely some dodgy stuff going on with Hunter and the laptop.

You assume that anyone who doesn’t like Trump must be a ‘lefty’. That’s stupid mate and makes no f**ken sense. Have a look at all of the people in his party that are unhappy with him. Are they lefties as well?

 

[Gary Gutful]

The reason it failed was because everyone could see it was plain and simple partisan politics with the exception of one disgruntled Republican.

Again no evidence mate. Show me evidence. How hard could it be if we have the worst and most heinous American President currently sitting in the Oval Office?

You should be able to point a laundry list of undisputable crimes that I would instantly feel the need to be a hater too.

I never said ‘the worst and most heinous’. I just said he was dodgy....and guess what?

I sAiD bIdEn wAs dOdGy aS wElL!!!!!!

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The sheer volume of lawsuits is unprecedented for a presidential nominee. No candidate of a major party has had anything approaching the number of Trump’s courtroom entanglements.

That's because career bureaucrats don't have any need to litigate. If they have a dispute there are workplace arrangements.

But business is high stakes, and when people can't agree to disagree they go to court. What a dumb article. It's up there with tRuMp-HaS-gOnE-bAnKrUpT-10o0-tImEs!!1

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You assume that anyone who doesn’t like Trump must be a ‘lefty’. That’s stupid mate and makes no f**ken sense. Have a look at all of the people in his party that are unhappy with him. Are they lefties as well?

No but they are swamp creatures.

 

[Gary Gutful]

No but they are swamp creatures.

Just don’t throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

[Eelogical]

Just don’t throw out the baby with the bath water.

Responsible people recycle bath water. Just sayin'.

 

[Eelogical]

I'll lay down $200. You lay down $120.

Gamble responsibly.

 

[Bandwagon]

Ha ha ha ha ha "give me the evidence"

Meanwhile, just a minute whilst I lay down a handful of unsupported claims that amount to nothing more than uninformed opinion.

 

[Eelogical]

Ha ha ha ha ha "give me the evidence"

Meanwhile, just a minute whilst I lay down a handful of unsupported claims that amount to nothing more than uninformed opinion.

Isn't an uninformed opinion just a misguided synopsis?

 

[Bandwagon]

Isn't an uninformed opinion just a misguided synopsis?

Yes, but a misguided synopsis isn't always an uninformed opinion.

 

[Eelogical]

Yes, but a misguided synopsis isn't always an uninformed opinion.

85% chance, for sure.