- Joined
- Mar 10, 2010
- Messages
- 22,866
- Reaction score
- 24,309
If he don’t pay, maybe you can go visit E Jean Carolll at her new place Carroll Lago.And she'll not see one dime of it.
If he don’t pay, maybe you can go visit E Jean Carolll at her new place Carroll Lago.And she'll not see one dime of it.
I wouldn't want to meet a girl that would want to kill my baby.
If you ever talked to women you'd know that is something they don't decide till after they get to know you.
83 million is such a ridiculous and arbitrary number.
I know.I don't talk to "those" "most" kind of women.
I know.
it is not arbitrary. This amount combined with the potential fine from the Leticia James case would be over the rumored 400 million Trump has in cash money. With these two rulings, it would be just the right amount to start force him to need to liquidate assets as he would be out of cash.
They even say it outloud with glee at the 1:50 mark below. They know exactly what they are doing. If he does have to liquidate, they will be able to then make headlines like "TRUMP OUT OF CASH, BANKRUPT" and so on
I don't see a whole lot of "glee" in that clip. That reporter appears to be just stating facts.
No. Just listen to the last 5 seconds. Through out the entire clip, she is clearly exciting, and then she adds at the very end. "It will finally put the LIE of endless wealth"
Saying that is a lie, when "endless" wealth is clearly hyperbole. She is clearly excited for Trump to be shown as a liar and show he has to sell stuff.
That statement at the end, especially the way she emphasizes LIE, is showing her clear bias and desire to have Trump go through this
Btw, Trump's lawyer afterwards was on fire. These ridiculous rulings are going to help his polling
No. Just listen to the last 5 seconds. Through out the entire clip, she is clearly exciting, and then she adds at the very end. "It will finally put the LIE of endless wealth"
Saying that is a lie, when "endless" wealth is clearly hyperbole. She is clearly excited for Trump to be shown as a liar and show he has to sell stuff.
That statement at the end, especially the way she emphasizes LIE, is showing her clear bias and desire to have Trump go through this
You said to listen to the glee at 1:50. I don't see anything wrong with the 1:50 mark. Even the end isn't really all that bad considering Trump has kind of lied and bragged about his wealth.
Of course there's bias though and she's probably not upset that he's losing money. Not many people in mainstream media are unbiased. This isn't really the best clip to show that imho. She seems pretty level-headed throughout.
Well, as a layer she is a dumpster fire, so its only fitting.loses $83 million case.
NBA jam announcer "she's on fire!"
Btw, Trump's lawyer afterwards was on fire. These ridiculous rulings are going to help his polling
Cool. Keep doing what you have been, Alina, it's worked out great so far!
The 1:50 is where she explains the amounts. Stop focusing on the glee part, though she is clearly excited and biased as you agree.
They even say it outloud with glee at the 1:50 mark below.
“Endless wealth” is hyperbole. I mean he can sell a property or two and could easily pay it and still have “endless wealth”. They just want the headline, just like Rudy getting an absolutely ridiculous fine amount as well, and right away the media can’t to circle jerk themselves that they bankrupted him
The 1:50 mark is where you told me to listen explicitly for the "glee":
Lol at telling me to not focus on your own words.
And no, I don't agree she is "excited" in this clip. I do agree she probably has some bias but it is not really evident from this clip. Surely there are better clips out there, especially those of the panels of idiots on both sides sitting around rubbing their hands at the thought of their side winning.
It is what it is, if you brag about your wealth and pretend like you're untouchable then this is what happens. Do you really expect people to not talk about whether you have funds if you claim you can't be touched financially?
Where did I say to listen for the glee? First, I quoted someone else and told them to listen to 1:50 to explain the amount between the two cases. I added my own comment that the said it with glee, I did not tell him to listen for the glee. If you disagree about the glee and excitement, Ok, the point was the amount
So, you’re clearly a moron and/or trying to twist my words to deflect. Anyways, nice talking
They even say it outloud with glee at the 1:50 mark below.