Doc Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 32 minutes ago, Kemp said: You still don't understand? I said my concern was threats made against Bragg by Trump, in regards to that case. I'm betting he's convicted. That's the point of the thread. Doc chickened out of betting against me after huffing and puffing. You have the option to take my bet, if you'd like. Nice rewrite of history. I offered to bet $1 and you put up $100 (down from $1000) since you're so confident it's going to happen given the odds you made up.
Kemp Posted March 25, 2023 Author Posted March 25, 2023 Just now, Chris farley said: You are not concerned with the details of the case. But what trump's response to it was? Lol. Ok. You can keep the bet. I ain't got much faith in a payout. The goal post would just pivot to the next story The details of the case aren't about whether sex occurred. The point of the case is whether Trump committed a crime by giving her $130,000. Again, I don't really care about it other than if he did commit a crime, he should be convicted of it. All that really matters are the federal case and the state case in Georgia. Convictions in those would be clear-cut felonies and certain jail time. 44 minutes ago, Chris farley said: You are not concerned with the details of the case. But what trump's response to it was? And would put money that the case is solid? Your right I don't understand that logic And you can keep the bet. I ain't got much faith in a payout. The goal post would just pivot to the next story I didn't think you'd understand it, but I took a shot. 43 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: And down the rabbit hole we go. Geez….you asked whether I thought he had sex with Ms Daniels….and I said I don’t care. YOU obviously do. Have a nice day. I don't care who Trump stuck it into. That's between him and Melania. Still avoiding the part about Trump's threats of violence against Bragg. I understand.
Kemp Posted March 25, 2023 Author Posted March 25, 2023 7 minutes ago, Doc said: Nice rewrite of history. I offered to bet $1 and you put up $100 (down from $1000) since you're so confident it's going to happen given the odds you made up. If you're scared to make an even-up bet, I understand. By asking for 100-1 odds, you're showing your fear of what's going to happen. I'm betting that a President of the United is going to be convicted of a crime. As far as I know, that's something that has never happened, so if anyone should be getting 100-1, it should be me, but I don't care about the enormous odds against it happening and willing to give you a break and bet 1-1. You don't have the courage to do so. Those are the facts.
Kemp Posted March 25, 2023 Author Posted March 25, 2023 Tourism update https://www.law360.com/compliance/articles/1589920
Doc Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 10 minutes ago, Kemp said: If you're scared to make an even-up bet, I understand. By asking for 100-1 odds, you're showing your fear of what's going to happen. I'm betting that a President of the United is going to be convicted of a crime. As far as I know, that's something that has never happened, so if anyone should be getting 100-1, it should be me, but I don't care about the enormous odds against it happening and willing to give you a break and bet 1-1. You don't have the courage to do so. Those are the facts. It was a response to the false bravado you have in thinking he'll be convicted, despite 6+ years of failure by the Dems. The "it has never happened before" means nothing and the odds you posted are what does. But OK, how much do you want to bet straight-up? 1
Tenhigh Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 On 3/22/2023 at 6:09 PM, Unforgiven said: here's some porn for you whack jobs. Go get a tissue and have fun idiots. How dare you! This is disgusting, Unforgiven! We don't kink shame on PPP! 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Kemp said: You still don't understand? They understand. This is part of their argument”technique”: pretending not to understand so they don’t need to reply to or acknowledge a winning point… Edited March 25, 2023 by redtail hawk 1
Tenhigh Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 2 hours ago, Kemp said: You still don't understand? I said my concern was threats made against Bragg by Trump, in regards to that case. I'm betting he's convicted. That's the point of the thread. Doc chickened out of betting against me after huffing and puffing. You have the option to take my bet, if you'd like. No. I asked someone's opinion about whether the sex occurred. I was looking for a bet on whether Trump gets a conviction. I am concerned. Can you post the links to the language Trump used to threaten Bragg? What is the actual quote?
Tenhigh Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 16 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: They understand. This is part of their argument”technique”: pretending not to understand so they don’t need to reply to or acknowledge a winning point… And for the record, I hope Trump goes away, whether to jail or otherwise. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 1 minute ago, Tenhigh said: Also known as cheating or being disingenuous
Tenhigh Posted March 25, 2023 Posted March 25, 2023 7 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Also known as cheating or being disingenuous I like this one better. Does anyone know why my pic links haven't worked well lately? 8 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Also known as cheating or being disingenuous Also, do you have the link to Trump threatening Bragg with violence? Is it this? https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-warns-potential-death-destruction-charged-hush-money-probe-rcna76500 "What kind of person can charge another person, in this case a former President of the United States, who got more votes than any sitting President in history, and leading candidate (by far!) for the Republican Party nomination, with a Crime, when it is known by all that NO Crime has been committed, & also known that potential death & destruction in such a false charge could be catastrophic for our Country?" Trump wrote. "Why & who would do such a thing? Only a degenerate psychopath that truely [sic] hates the USA!" 2
Kemp Posted March 26, 2023 Author Posted March 26, 2023 21 hours ago, Doc said: It was a response to the false bravado you have in thinking he'll be convicted, despite 6+ years of failure by the Dems. The "it has never happened before" means nothing and the odds you posted are what does. But OK, how much do you want to bet straight-up? $100? 20 hours ago, Tenhigh said: I am concerned. Can you post the links to the language Trump used to threaten Bragg? What is the actual quote? https://nypost.com/2023/03/24/trump-shares-pic-holding-baseball-bat-near-das-head/ 1
SoCal Deek Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 22 hours ago, Kemp said: The details of the case aren't about whether sex occurred. The point of the case is whether Trump committed a crime by giving her $130,000. Wrong. That is not the basis of the indictment. The case is essentially about bookkeeping. The issue is whether it’s illegal to use campaign funds for this sort of payment. It is NOT illegal for two people to willingly enter into a contract exchanging money for a ‘gag order’. (you gotta love the use of gag order 😉)
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Wrong. That is not the basis of the indictment. The case is essentially about bookkeeping. The issue is whether it’s illegal to use campaign funds for this sort of payment. It is NOT illegal for two people to willingly enter into a contract exchanging money for a ‘gag order’. (you gotta love the use of gag order 😉) it's about campaign finance funds but i suppose bookkeeping sounds benign
SoCal Deek Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 1 minute ago, redtail hawk said: it's about campaign finance funds but i suppose bookkeeping sounds benign Did I not say campaign funds? Or are we just being really selective in our reading skills today? 1
Doc Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Kemp said: $100? OK. You're on. For a felony conviction for each of the three cases you listed. You can put the check in the mail for the Stormy Daniels case, since that's, ahem, going down. Then right after put one in for the classified docs since taking Trump down means taking down Joke. Edited March 26, 2023 by Doc
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 (edited) https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/3918882-bharara-idea-that-trump-hush-money-probe-is-unprecedented-is-just-false/ Cohen has admitted to setting up the payment and was sentenced to three years in prison. “[Cohen’s] lawyer thought it was a crime, allowed him to plead guilty to it. The prosecutors in the Southern District of New York thought it was a crime. The judge accepted the guilty plea, thought it was a crime,” Bharara said on Sunday. “So you can argue about whether or not it’s appropriate to bring such a case. You can argue about the optics of it. But the idea that this is unprecedented is just false. It’s just wrong,” the former U.S. attorney added, referring to the Trump investigation. Edited March 26, 2023 by redtail hawk
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, B-Man said: NBC legal analyst says claims walls are closing in on Trump are ‘undeniably true’ THIS time In the last few years you’ve heard it a million times: “The walls are closing in on Trump!” It’s become a joke but those who keep getting their hopes up and then dashed repeatedly don’t seem to realize it. Attorney and NBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner was on MSNBC and confirmed that it’s “undeniably true” Because you say so? and you're always right?😂 btw, the Vegas bookies disagree with your Vegas propaganda source. you can get really good odds on trump escaping indictment. Did you place a bet? Edited March 26, 2023 by redtail hawk
Recommended Posts