By the way -- if you claim to be a Christian...

[SkepticThinker]

Communism is a belief system based on the false prophet Lenin and Marx, who profess heaven on earth if you follow their path. People kill each other to promote its rule, much like is done with the Muslims throughout history, when they have the means and opportunity. It has its book, and its false prophets, and it's crazy proponents, such as Stalin and Mao, who have killed millions in trying to spread its faith. Now it has its own corporate media to spread its false narratives.

It's a political theory and/or an economic system. Not a religion.

Communism: Karl Marx to Joseph Stalin | CES at UNC

europe.unc.edu

Corporate media is communist? LOL Good one.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Apparently civil courts in jurisdictions such as New York are a joke. The judge made judgment before the case was heard and refused testimony from the defense. One can only hope Karma finds the people who hold to such standards.

Ah, so it gets even better. You are picking and choosing which specific civil court judgments you will accept, based upon your own political leanings, no less!

LOL Try that after being found liable in a civil court and see what happens to you.

 

[metis]

I wish I had a penny for every time you stated you were done with me. I will believe it when I see it. I don't think you can help yourself.

Maybe because I'm a glutton for punishment. OK, I'll fix that now.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can craft your words anyway you choose if you somehow think that is going to help you keep your sanity. People were banned (ineligible to receive Moderna shots) in Europe, specifically in Sweden and Finland. Sweden had the best outcomes, one reason being they didn't close down schools. On the other hand, the US forced all their military to receive covid shots against their will dire consequences for the troops. WATCH: 'Tyrants!' Shock video as military pounces on member refusing COVID shot | WND | by Around the Web

I wish I had a penny for every time you stated you were done with me. I will believe it when I see it. I don't think you can help yourself.

And now you are back to claiming that alcohol is banned in the US.

If it is not a total ban it is improper to use the term "ban" without a qualifier.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Feel free to list a credible "religion" which does not require two witnesses. The Muslim's may require two women for each man witness, but they still require either two men, or one man and two women. As for the religion of Marx, well that final destination is communism, the realm of dictators, and the court is a sham anyway, but as in China, it does require "beyond a reasonable doubt", and leans on documentational evidence. The "sexual" case with Trump was a civil case, and the requirement was a "preponderance of evidence", in a prejudicial court. If that is how you roll, one can only hope someday you meet Mr. Karma.

Alright let's go over the evidence against Trump. It was not just a "he said she said" case. You are ignoring the other evidence that was brought up in the case Carroll told her close friends about the event when it happened and they were able to confirm her claims. Now that would have been incredibly prescient of her to tell friends in the past knowing that she would need them in the future, or, and you might seriously consider this, the event actually happened. Second other women testified about similar behavior by Trump. I do not know if the Billy Bush, oh I just double checked and yes that was allowed in too where Trump said about women "Grab them by the *****". Lastly Trump lost all credibility when it was shown in a deposition that not only had E. Jean Carroll met Trump. Trump proved that he lied when he said "She is not my type". When given the photo of E. Jean Carroll he correctly identified her husband. He misidentified E. Jean Carroll as his ex-wife Maarla Maples. His voice was amazingly wistful when he identified Carroll as Marla.


" This suit went to trial in April 2023. Evidence included testimony from two friends Carroll spoke to after the incident, a photograph of Carroll with Trump in 1987,[a]E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia testimony from two women who had separately accused Trump of sexual assault, footage from the Trump Access Hollywood tape and his October 2022 deposition.[c]"

E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

To claim that it was a "He said she said" case is patently false.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think DJT stock went up to around $50 per share. I don't think Trump's heirs have too much to worry about, especially as they have talents to work with. Keep in mind that New Yorkers voted twice for AOC. Not that they know they even have a representative, but not knowing is enough to cast doubt on their abilities to remain focused on matters at hand. Although, the black community in New York is raising questions, but a little too late for their present circumstances. People often get what they ask for, and at a high cost.

It is currently at around $37 per share. It has lost over half of its value that it had at the start. And Trump and family cannot legally sell their shares at the moment. I would have to look it up, but to protect other investors the owners are not allowed instantly dump a lot of their stock.

It could crash to the value I have seen experts estimate it to be and that is only $6 a share.

https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/DJT

 

[2ndpillar]

It is currently at around $37 per share. It has lost over half of its value that it had at the start. And Trump and family cannot legally sell their shares at the moment. I would have to look it up, but to protect other investors the owners are not allowed instantly dump a lot of their stock.

It could crash to the value I have seen experts estimate it to be and that is only $6 a share.

At the present price, Trump's worth in stock would be just less than 3 billion. The traders are now positioning long and short calls, which makes the stock a little jumpy. Trump can according to the initial agreement sell after 6 months, or when the partners agree. The partners are Trump supporters in general and have little reason not to agree to allow Trump to sell if he needs a little $140 million in cash, or 14% of his holdings. Their whole value is based on the Trump name, and the number of his supporters. If the partners peeve the Trump supporters, who buy the stock, apart from short and long sellers, that would not be good for the stock. Without the Trump name, the stock would have little or no value. That is why it is called DJT. If DJT jumps in price, the short sellers will probably lose their shirts, and maybe their pants.

 

[2ndpillar]

Maybe because I'm a glutton for punishment. OK, I'll fix that now.

Now, if you leave, who is going to protect your "many" from going down their wide path to "destruction" (Matthew 7:13).

 

[Subduction Zone]

At the present price, Trump's worth in stock would be just less than 3 billion. The traders are now positioning long and short calls, which makes the stock a little jumpy. Trump can according to the initial agreement sell after 6 months, or when the partners agree. The partners are Trump supporters in general and have little reason not to agree to allow Trump to sell if he needs a little $140 million in cash, or 14% of his holdings. Their whole value is based on the Trump name, and the number of his supporters. If the partners peeve the Trump supporters, who buy the stock, apart from short and long sellers, that would not be good for the stock. Without the Trump name, the stock would have little or no value. That is why it is called DJT. If DJT jumps in price, the short sellers will probably lose their shirts, and maybe their pants.

If people come to their senses the value of the stock would drop down to about $6 a share. Right now it is grossly overpriced based upon both income, it is operating at a huge loss currently, and future use. It is very limited. Not that many people are MAGA's. It is hopefully just a temporary evil quirk of the right.

 

[2ndpillar]

Ah, so it gets even better. You are picking and choosing which specific civil court judgments you will accept, based upon your own political leanings, no less!

LOL Try that after being found liable in a civil court and see what happens to you.

So far, I am the one who has brought cases up in civil court, and thankfully, it was not in California or New York. Where I am from, judgments don't run to 140 million dollars for defamation of a sex advice columnist, who names her pets "vagina". In the last case, I had two lawyer friends write me up a paper to proceed with, without charge. j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

 

[Subduction Zone]

So far, I am the one who has brought cases up in civil court, and thankfully, it was not in California or New York. Where I am from, judgments don't run to 140 million dollars for defamation of a sex advice columnist, who names her pets "vagina". In the last case, I had two lawyer friends write me up a paper to proceed with, without charge. j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

Why even bring up such non sequiturs? The reason that the defamation judgement in the second case was so high was because Trump himself demonstrated that the amount in the first case was too low.

 

[2ndpillar]

Why even bring up such non sequiturs? The reason that the defamation judgement in the second case was so high was because Trump himself demonstrated that the amount in the first case was too low.

So says you. You won't watch the video of the crazy J. Carroll, but everyone else should.

j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

www.bing.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

So says you. You won't watch the video of the crazy J. Carroll, but everyone else should.

j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

www.bing.com

Why should I? Let's assume that she is "crazy". It can be shown by the same standards that Trump is even "crazier". Trump though not part of the trial Trump himself admitted that he peeped on underaged girls in a state of undress and the women who were peeped on confirmed it. Anything that Carroll has done Trump has done worse. That really does not help you, it only opens the door to more of Trump's antics.

 

[2ndpillar]

Why should I? Let's assume that she is "crazy". It can be shown by the same standards that Trump is even "crazier". Trump though not part of the trial Trump himself admitted that he peeped on underaged girls in a state of undress and the women who were peeped on confirmed it. Anything that Carroll has done Trump has done worse. That really does not help you, it only opens the door to more of Trump's antics.

Here is a video of the crazy Carroll describing her encounter with Trump. Like with you, apparently getting rid of Trump is a goal that permits the use of any means possible.

j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

www.bing.com

 

[SkepticThinker]

Communism is a belief system based on the false prophet Lenin and Marx, who profess heaven on earth if you follow their path. People kill each other to promote its rule, much like is done with the Muslims throughout history, when they have the means and opportunity. It has its book, and its false prophets, and it's crazy proponents, such as Stalin and Mao, who have killed millions in trying to spread its faith. Now it has its own corporate media to spread its false narratives.

You should take a political science course. Communism is a political/economic theory.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Alright let's go over the evidence against Trump. It was not just a "he said she said" case. You are ignoring the other evidence that was brought up in the case Carroll told her close friends about the event when it happened and they were able to confirm her claims. Now that would have been incredibly prescient of her to tell friends in the past knowing that she would need them in the future, or, and you might seriously consider this, the event actually happened. Second other women testified about similar behavior by Trump. I do not know if the Billy Bush, oh I just double checked and yes that was allowed in too where Trump said about women "Grab them by the *****". Lastly Trump lost all credibility when it was shown in a deposition that not only had E. Jean Carroll met Trump. Trump proved that he lied when he said "She is not my type". When given the photo of E. Jean Carroll he correctly identified her husband. He misidentified E. Jean Carroll as his ex-wife Maarla Maples. His voice was amazingly wistful when he identified Carroll as Marla.


" This suit went to trial in April 2023. Evidence included testimony from two friends Carroll spoke to after the incident, a photograph of Carroll with Trump in 1987,[a]E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia testimony from two women who had separately accused Trump of sexual assault, footage from the Trump Access Hollywood tape and his October 2022 deposition.[c]"

E. Jean Carroll v. Donald J. Trump - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

To claim that it was a "He said she said" case is patently false.

Thank you (again)!

 

[SkepticThinker]

So far, I am the one who has brought cases up in civil court, and thankfully, it was not in California or New York.
Where I am from, judgments don't run to 140 million dollars for defamation of a sex advice columnist,

You've confused this case with his fraud case again. He owes E. Jean Carroll $85 million.

who names her pets "vagina".
In the last case, I had two lawyer friends write me up a paper to proceed with, without charge. j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

Once again, that's a ridiculous lie that Trump made up to defame her. You're repeating his claims that got him hit with the suit in the first place.

Let's assume for the sake of discussion that she named a pet "vagina." So what? What's your point here? That she couldn't have been sexually abused, or .... ? Do tell what argument you're trying to make here, exactly. It sounds like more nonsensical perpetuation of rape culture to me.

And what's your big point in pointing out that she writes a sex column? Does that mean she's incapable of being sexually abused?

 

[SkepticThinker]

So says you. You won't watch the video of the crazy J. Carroll, but everyone else should.

j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

www.bing.com

What's your video supposed to prove? That "crazy" people can't be sexually abused?
I assure you that they can.

Otherwise, what's your point here? Are you just here to further defame E. Jean Carroll? Maybe she should bring a case against you.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Here is a video of the crazy Carroll describing her encounter with Trump. Like with you, apparently getting rid of Trump is a goal that permits the use of any means possible.

j carroll video in red hair - Search Videos

www.bing.com

If my abuser were running to be leader of a country, I promise you I would do everything in my power to make sure that he didn't win.
Bad people shouldn't be leading countries.

 

[shunyadragon]

All of it. Unbelief is sin (Romans 14:23)

Belief in ancient myths is a greater sin neglecting the reality of God's Creation today.