Just bringing the thread to its logical conclusion.

Rookie wrote:Mountain - Mississippi Queen

Rolling Stones Honky Tonk Women

Am I allowed to say Honky?

Holy **** you said it twice.

ToddTT wrote:

Rookie wrote:Mountain - Mississippi Queen

Rolling Stones Honky Tonk Women

Am I allowed to say Honky?

Holy **** you said it twice.

Pigmently challenged?

I’m working on the SSL thing too.

blkexec wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

blkexec wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:First, the caveats:

1. Forgot where we landed on 'political talk,' if I'm overstepping the boundaries just shut it down.

2. Trump is a fraudster. Trump University was a hoax.

3. No doubt that Trump inflated the value of his properties.

BUT, my big issue is the government bringing the case in the first place. I really don't like the idea of prosecutors having the right to enter a civil contract without either of the parties to the contract bringing suit. It just seems to open the bag to way too much government interference in private life. Any legal eagles know if this is already something government does regularly or has done before?

Committing bank fraud is illegal.
Isn't a DA's job to prosecute illegal acts?
Regardless if the victim initiates any legal action.

Maybe relating it to other illegal acts in which the "government" is responsible for enforcing laws and regulations. Should a police officer stop cars breaking speeding ordinances? Or just they wait until the speeder causes an accident and the victim files a complaint?

Trump reminds me of a husband who is a pathological liar and constantly cheats. Which he is.
And Trump followers are the gullible wife living in denial.
He gets caught cheating but once again tells his wife he has not done anything wrong and that everyone that saw him with another woman is crazy and just lying. And despite it happening over and over again the wife keeps taking him back.

It's a sad time in our country when a figure who preaches hate and discrimination is so popular.
Which is exactly what I knew would happen when he was elected.

No what’s sad are people who are in denial that this country was built on hate, murder, rape (by the very same immigrants politicians are now trying to keep out) and 400 years discrimination, bigotry and racism. If you look at the very history of America, Trump looks like a saint.

Trump is a pawn in a system that controls him and this demonic construct we see everyday. Americans love gangsters and thugs because that’s who stole this country. So nothing 45 does should surprise anybody.

As many of your posts, you seem to like arguing with yourself by making up extrapolated narratives.
Said it's a sad time. You agreed but disagreed in your response? Did I say it never happened before?

Disagree that this country was built on hate, murder and rape. You must be in the wrong country. This country was built on hard work, sacrifice, initiative and education despite all the hate, murder and rape.
Lots of horrible things happen throughout the worlds History. Not just in the US. The US has always been closest, not perfect, to keeping the balance of good people fighting for equal rights over those promoting hate and discrimination. Still obvious we have a long way to go and maybe an impossible endeavor.

It’s sad that you’re stuck on the surface (Trump) instead of the soil he came out of (The System). Once you understand world history, nothing he’s doing surprises me. He represents the voices inside of more than half this country. Especially his supporters who are filled with the same ignorance. The problem is you take any response to a broad yet popular post YOU CREATED, and direct all that energy into you. It’s an open forum don’t forget that.

Not sure what I disagreed with. If anything I doubled down and described how this very soil created this guy. And why he’s allowed to be a thug and get away with it. And not just get away with it, but he’s going to be the next president again. That’s the real issue. The longer we ignore that, the more trump-etts will continue to appear in different forms of energy.

“Sincere Ignorance and Consciousness Stupidity”

Agree with much of what you say is the underlying issue. Problem is that your defensiveness assumes that I do not. Which reinforces my point that you often extrapolating narratives from simple statements posted. Ie,"it's a sad time when someone like Trump is so popular". Strange when the statement makes it obvious that I am in the same side of the opinion

This seems to be the case in several of our discussions before. Are you still upset with one of my past comments. Maybe the "Deuce is not very good"?

Back to thread topic, I have a bit more faith in the majority than you do. It sometimes feels like there are more scumbags and racists. But only because they are louder and easier to spot. I think there are more good people out there that know what Trump represents is wrong. They will show up come election day and who will eventually put these roaches back under a rock.

martin wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:First, the caveats:

1. Forgot where we landed on 'political talk,' if I'm overstepping the boundaries just shut it down.

2. Trump is a fraudster. Trump University was a hoax.

3. No doubt that Trump inflated the value of his properties.

BUT, my big issue is the government bringing the case in the first place. I really don't like the idea of prosecutors having the right to enter a civil contract without either of the parties to the contract bringing suit. It just seems to open the bag to way too much government interference in private life. Any legal eagles know if this is already something government does regularly or has done before?

You are against something you literally have zero background or firm understanding of what you are talking about.

Thats the basis for your (uninformed? misguided?) opinion?

I wouldn't say zero background. It was a civil, not criminally trial. That's why Hofstra's first two analogies didn't sit right with me- prostitution and speeding are criminal offenses. My question was if the state has the right to file in a civil suit. I respect your knowledge and that of others in this forum. And yes, I'm probably less informed than a lot of people here and maybe misguided. That's why I ask.

blkexec wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

blkexec wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

blkexec wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:First, the caveats:

1. Forgot where we landed on 'political talk,' if I'm overstepping the boundaries just shut it down.

2. Trump is a fraudster. Trump University was a hoax.

3. No doubt that Trump inflated the value of his properties.

BUT, my big issue is the government bringing the case in the first place. I really don't like the idea of prosecutors having the right to enter a civil contract without either of the parties to the contract bringing suit. It just seems to open the bag to way too much government interference in private life. Any legal eagles know if this is already something government does regularly or has done before?

Committing bank fraud is illegal.
Isn't a DA's job to prosecute illegal acts?
Regardless if the victim initiates any legal action.

Maybe relating it to other illegal acts in which the "government" is responsible for enforcing laws and regulations. Should a police officer stop cars breaking speeding ordinances? Or just they wait until the speeder causes an accident and the victim files a complaint?

Trump reminds me of a husband who is a pathological liar and constantly cheats. Which he is.
And Trump followers are the gullible wife living in denial.
He gets caught cheating but once again tells his wife he has not done anything wrong and that everyone that saw him with another woman is crazy and just lying. And despite it happening over and over again the wife keeps taking him back.

It's a sad time in our country when a figure who preaches hate and discrimination is so popular.
Which is exactly what I knew would happen when he was elected.

No what’s sad are people who are in denial that this country was built on hate, murder, rape (by the very same immigrants politicians are now trying to keep out) and 400 years discrimination, bigotry and racism. If you look at the very history of America, Trump looks like a saint.

Trump is a pawn in a system that controls him and this demonic construct we see everyday. Americans love gangsters and thugs because that’s who stole this country. So nothing 45 does should surprise anybody.

As many of your posts, you seem to like arguing with yourself by making up extrapolated narratives.
Said it's a sad time. You agreed but disagreed in your response? Did I say it never happened before?

Disagree that this country was built on hate, murder and rape. You must be in the wrong country. This country was built on hard work, sacrifice, initiative and education despite all the hate, murder and rape.
Lots of horrible things happen throughout the worlds History. Not just in the US. The US has always been closest, not perfect, to keeping the balance of good people fighting for equal rights over those promoting hate and discrimination. Still obvious we have a long way to go and maybe an impossible endeavor.

It’s sad that you’re stuck on the surface (Trump) instead of the soil he came out of (The System). Once you understand world history, nothing he’s doing surprises me. He represents the voices inside of more than half this country. Especially his supporters who are filled with the same ignorance. The problem is you take any response to a broad yet popular post YOU CREATED, and direct all that energy into you. It’s an open forum don’t forget that.

Not sure what I disagreed with. If anything I doubled down and described how this very soil created this guy. And why he’s allowed to be a thug and get away with it. And not just get away with it, but he’s going to be the next president again. That’s the real issue. The longer we ignore that, the more trump-etts will continue to appear in different forms of energy.

“Sincere Ignorance and Consciousness Stupidity”

Agree with much of what you say is the underlying issue. Problem is that your defensiveness assumes that I do not. Which reinforces my point that you often extrapolating narratives from simple statements posted. Ie,"it's a sad time when someone like Trump is so popular". Strange when the statement makes it obvious that I am in the same side of the opinion

This seems to be the case in several of our discussions before. Are you still upset with one of my past comments. Maybe the "Deuce is not very good"?

Back to thread topic, I have a bit more faith in the majority than you do. It sometimes feels like there are more scumbags and racists. But only because they are louder and easier to spot. I think there are more good people out there that know what Trump represents is wrong. They will show up come election day and who will eventually put these roaches back under a rock.

You’re stuck on you and sometimes it’s not always about you. Next time I’ll just start my own post.

We can cut the weeds (Trump), but if we not pulling them from the roots (System), the weeds will just grow back.

Who started what thread? Confused.
Still arguing when we agree.
Don't get you man.
You got some kind of hang up on that high horse.
No worries though. Ride on.

gradyandrew wrote:

martin wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

martin wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:First, the caveats:

1. Forgot where we landed on 'political talk,' if I'm overstepping the boundaries just shut it down.

2. Trump is a fraudster. Trump University was a hoax.

3. No doubt that Trump inflated the value of his properties.

BUT, my big issue is the government bringing the case in the first place. I really don't like the idea of prosecutors having the right to enter a civil contract without either of the parties to the contract bringing suit. It just seems to open the bag to way too much government interference in private life. Any legal eagles know if this is already something government does regularly or has done before?

You are against something you literally have zero background or firm understanding of what you are talking about.

Thats the basis for your (uninformed? misguided?) opinion?

I wouldn't say zero background. It was a civil, not criminally trial. That's why Hofstra's first two analogies didn't sit right with me- prostitution and speeding are criminal offenses. My question was if the state has the right to file in a civil suit. I respect your knowledge and that of others in this forum. And yes, I'm probably less informed than a lot of people here and maybe misguided. That's why I ask.

So I don’t get your take. Why come to an opinion on something before you even have much of a background on a subject?

Seems like an odd sequence of things.

I get asking questions on it, but that’s a different path.

Honestly man, I'm hoping you will explain it to me. I know you are deep in this **** and my initial take is that this is more about sinking Trump's run than the actual charges, which to me is a dangerous slope- when politicians are facing prison or dictatorship, they usually choose the latter.

So, a useful nudge in the right direction would be appreciated. Or not.

State and Federal govt bring both civil and criminal charges against people and entities all the time. This is not a new thing, like at all. Since the beginning of time.

Leona Helmsley is a good parallel that we all should have at least heard the name. She got big fines and jail time for pretty much the same things Trump is getting fined for. There are lots of instances of this all over the place.

You will maybe find this hard to believe but DA’s often run on platforms of prosecuting criminals any which way they can. They often run by actually naming their scumbag targets. As with mob bosses like Al Capone and ****bags like Trump and pretty much his entire family. Much like the full Republican Party is running around on platforms of trying to murder and prosecute the most helpless and poorest people in parts of central and South America who are mostly just trying to flee from terror in their own home countries by way of coming to the country of the home of the free and brave. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

Or maybe not so much?