Ooooh….Trump on the stand was a disaster.
Couldn’t speak up. Couldn’t answer questions. Couldn’t stay on topic so badly the judge repeatedly told him to stop telling stories and answer the questions. He shot back with “why, you’re just going to rule against me anyway.”…a self fulfilling prophecy if I’ve ever heard one.

When he did answer, his answers were insanity like “banks don’t care about financial statements, I know, I’ve been doing this a long time.” Not a good idea to remind the judge that there are hundreds more instances of major fraud you aren’t being prosecuted for because of the statute of limitations.

Turns out banks DO care, and will be suing for the $180 million he cheated them out of in interest by lying about his collateral, plus interest and penalties…assuming he isn’t stripped of every dime by New York State first by disgorgement….which is taking back ill gotten gains.

Also nonsensical shit like “I could have added my brand value and immediately made those properties worth 10 to 100 times as much” forgetting that not only had they doubled the value or more for his “brand value” but again for “presidential value”.

And “they undervalued my properties here by 1000 times!” forgetting that not only was the $18-24 million appraised value agreed on and signed off by Trump, he actually went to court to get it lowered claiming Maralago WASN’T worth +-$20 million it was worth far LESS. Now he’s in court telling everyone that was another pure tax fraud lie he told in Florida to cheat Florida out of tens of millions in property taxes…if Maralago is really worth billions, not $18 million he claims for taxes, that means Trump owes evaded property taxes on $982000000, over $10 million per year for as long as he’s owned it….plus penalties and interest. That’s his DEFENSE! 🤦‍♂️ 😂

Most of his testimony was stricken as rambling and non responsive.

He was nearly thrown out of court for his out of control behavior. He acted like a spoiled three year old. Don’t be surprised if there’s a major contempt charge this afternoon….possibly remand.

Edit: Also don’t be surprised if he’s just dismissed from the stand, has his testimony stricken completely, and as the judge has warned the judge takes every negative inference possible, assuming every answer he would have given was the worst possible answer for Trump. That seems to be Trumps plan…attempt anything to later make the argument at appeal that the judge was biased and didn’t give Trump a fair trial…but the record proves otherwise and appeals courts read the record. That ploy won’t work…Trump’s lawyers are awful. It’s never a good strategy to try to lose as big as possible in court.

Now, keep in mind, this is just New York, where he’s already been found guilty and they’re just determining the punishment….other states he’s done fraudulent business in are undoubtedly watching closely to see if they should file next.

I love it when a plan comes together.

The best part is, being a CIVIL case, Congress can (and will) draw negative inference from a 5th amendment plea….they can assume the worst every time he won’t answer, perfectly legal and normal to do exactly that in civil cases….like this pre prosecution.


Bye Felicia.

oh geez...he only did that ONE TIME! America is already tired of hearing about that... /s

is that the 'fake news' referred to, Ivan?

hadn't heard that the shooter was a Kool-Aid drinker (source?) but did hear that the attack was in a neighborhood with a vastly Hispanic/Asian populace.

so why the inference of 'lefty-ism'? NY? black? if so, shouldn't that be offset by being a mass shooter?

anyway check out this picture at this site... https://www.curbed.com/2022/04/francisco-puebla-subway-suspect-frank-james.html
..seems that hero's 'salute' is more American than this...
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/01/06/23/37698406-9120301-image-a-41_1609977097492.jpg

Hail Ukraine!

I was looking forward to contacting you upon finishing my foray.

imagine my happy surprise at your rather wonderful and welcome intercedence on behalf of all things light and transcendental in nature.

Thank you old friend.

I applaud and thank you further for the enlightened and inspired suggestion to resolution of the situation though I infer there to be a lag in implementation at best.

As I was unaware of the possible agitation my efforts evidently caused, I somewhat bristled at the unjustified, that is to my mind, action taken at no infraction of which I am aware.

Is instahobbling not regarded as inappropriate thusly invoked?

In any case, my reaction to such was averted by your intervention and I, again, thank you.

very nicely done summary of earth's history - although some pretty speculative inferences about the evolutionary process detracts from the credibility of the whole.

Did I say HE is a MAGA moron?
No, I did not, you inferred it, although it would be a relatively safe assumption based on his ignorant racist interruption and self centered disrespect paired with the inane irrationality of his question and blatantly racist comments.
Now who's making slanderous assumptions?

Your messiah slanders without (it's one word, Bob, not two) knowing daily. A bit hypocritical to denounce that when you so often applaud it, don't you think?

And my what is no better than the guy?
Your: possessive- belonging to you- "Your assumption is based in ignorance."
You're: conjunction- You are- "You're in desperate need of a better education because your English would fail a 3rd grade English class."

I might just WHAT another douchebag? You forgot the verb. You get an F for the day, Bobski. Nigerian princes have better English skills, and terrible English is an intentional part of their scam. (Or were you channeling Yoda but forgot the punctuation? As in "Look in the mirror, you might. Just another douchebag looking back.")

You need to watch some more school house rock and learn English better, then you might understand complex statements better and not jump to mistaken conclusions so often. Might I suggest starting with conjunction junction?

Also, I wrote MAGA, not MEGA, aside from MEGA making zero sense, I wouldn't ever insult MegaMan by conflating him with idiots like this guy. Besides an education, you seem to need glasses. Maybe that's why you can't see any of Trump's infinite character flaws?
Sad.

Lol. Even you aren't ignorant or dumb enough to not know this is a well known white supremacist racial hate slogan, not an equality movement slogan, not a non inflammatory statement.

Edit...when you see bald white guys wearing t-shirts printed with "14-18-88" you would insist they're just clean cut math enthusiasts. There is none so blind as he who will not see.

Um....take another English class Vlad, I think you mean nuts infer hate, because you just called your own cohorts nuts. It's crystal clear they are implying hate with these pro white fliers being posted only in minority areas and schools, not predominantly white areas and schools....you need #10 RWNJ goggles to hide that fact from yourself.

Rightwing cowardly assholes can't stand behind their own hate in public, but revel in it when they're together in private. You're cohorts are afraid to admit who they are, so afraid of everything they're afraid of themselves, or at least they're afraid of the repercussions of exposure. That's why they can't admit what's obvious to everyone who isn't delusionally biased....that they're racist.

Remember, it's RWNJ's like yourself that totally lost their shit and continue to be triggered today over "black lives matter", insisting it's a racist movement and slogan...now they want to hide their obvious racist intent by pretending they're emulating that social justice movement when challenged...it's laughably transparent.

I guess you didn't watch this video, because there was plenty of right wing fear there....ending in the creation of your fear...."it's not ok to be white"...a Fox news created slogan you were terrified by. Boy do they have your number.

You are helping them spread the white supremacist message by only looking at life with your blinders and right wing goggles on.

I was referring to the headline itself.
It seemed to be inferring that if only they had a wee bit more time... seeing as you were all about how things were being phrased.
That is how I took it at first but then was actually somewhat miffed they didn't fulfill my bias against them in the actual article.
I read into it what I was used to seeing on there.
I could have deleted it but I let it stand as an exercise in how the mind sees what it wants or is expecting to.
As for the decision on Acosta.
I saw that early this morning.
It was of course covered by Fox as well.

Or perhaps that they stopped her to accuse her of a crime, confront, and challenge her. None of your definitions include this "in error or being rude" inference you want to draw from it, that's your bias twisting definitions to suit your faux outrage.

I accosted my wife at the door with surprise plans to go out to dinner. I would use that sentence. I'm 48....not sure what generation you're from.

What nonsense are you spouting now...no one said she shouldn't have been accosted, you just take umbrage with the term for some reason, so decry the report as biased fake news or something.
Using the proper word to describe events is nothing like Fox making shit up. I don't have a clue what you mean.

Too late, I'm bald. That excuses me from having to watch any more Faux news. ;-)

Derp. That would be a Trump, not an Accosta.

Have fun with your persecution complex. I find you ridiculous and incapable of honest evaluation. Bye now.

Edit: True, Trump didn't say all Mexicans are rapists like some others have claimed, he said all Mexican/central American immigrants are rapists....like I claimed.

They used "accost" because 3 large men tackled a topless woman in tights (so clearly unarmed unless she had a snuke), hard....it's a proper and correct description using the correct terminology. Your inference that they were implying something improper by the police is likely your bias coloring what they said.

Lol. Censor you!? I think perhaps you might look up that word too, because I don't think it means what you think it does. I certainly don't have either that power or desire. I wish only to dissuade you from being an unwitting dupe of an Orwellian movement against fact and truth.

There is no equivalent stupidity or bias on the left, not by half...not by 1/10.
Again, please name reporters that speak at Democratic rallies....from any non right wing network since limiting you to CNN yielded no answer. If the left is just as bad as the right in this regard, that should be incredibly easy to do.

It seems having it pointed out that there is no equivalence is intolerable and like an attack in your eyes, but it's simply fact.

I know, facts are for liberals. The truth isn't the truth. What you see and hear isn't really what's happening....also known as blackwhite/duckspeak.

There is no other main stream network besides Fox who's viewers are actually less informed than people who watch no news at all, and OAN and Info Wars likely perform the same job for minor networks. CNN isn't perfect, but it's viewers actually gain information and become more informed rather than loose it, becoming more ignorant. They are not equivalent.

OK, the actual statement made by Melania's camp (as seen on screen at 1:10):
"I don't believe Mrs. Trump has ever discussed her thoughts on anything with Mr. Giuliani."

That's a pretty significant nudge. To me, pretty clearly says "don't put words in my mouth". You can infer it as "don't put words in my mouth, you weaselly little prick", but the statement itself is pretty carefully reserved in the exact wording.

Newsworthy? Sure. But to me, I think a good journalist (and I'd usually include Anderson Cooper in that camp) should show the statement itself, without any opinion or commentary first, and then make a distinct segue showing that we're now moving into pundit's reactions and opinions.

The lead here was "First Lady Melania Trump's Office Fires Back at Rudy Giuliani Over His Remarks About Stormy Daniels". That just seems a bit clickbait-y to me. "Fires Back" requires reading between the lines of the statement itself. Accurate? Probably. But I think they should have honored the carefully worded nature of the actual statement and gone with something like ..."Responds to" instead of "Fires Back".

Furthermore, they should have kept the full text of the statement itself up on the screen during the whole reaction/opinion portion segment where Cooper and the other talking heads discuss things. By all means, discuss. I even mostly agree with their interpretations and take on the situation. But keep the text of the actual statement up so that viewers can decide for themselves.


The Daily Show with Jon Stewart was actually fantastic for hoisting people on their own petard by fairly and accurately showing their actual statements and reacting to them -- no bait and switch / obfuscation necessary. Stewart's kind of subtlety in pointing out contradictions and bullshit was awesome.

I guess I feel like the best response to Trump's "Fake News" shtick is to be doubly rigorous when it comes to journalistic integrity. Trump's gonna give you plenty of ammo to use against him. Use it, but do it in such a way that any allegations of bias or unfairness are clearly wrong.

They've been here long enough to get to silver star. I have a hard time believing they don't understand. They'd have to, if even just by osmosis and inference.

It's the changing the channel assignments back to the incorrect ones that's kinda putting me off.

I think you'll find they understand perfectly, they just don't care and are basically "spamming".

I think you may be the only one that thinks they are inferring that he actually said that. Do you also think the next line "we're gonna have a party" is also something they are inferring he said?

Trump will veto that, hide and watch....but I hope not so you can see that this memo is nothing but republicans making accusations, not evidence, just inferences drawn from implications based on not reading reports. The classified report they claim to reference isn't being released, just the partisan Republican memo...while the Democrat version of that interpretation memo was kept classified.

Funny, Trump's people claimed McCabe stepped down of his own accord, a few months before his scheduled retirement. He's not fired, he didn't quit, he wasn't even asked to leave, much less forced out. He just switched positions...ostensibly to avoid any further contact with Trump who acts like a bully on the phone, taunting the man's wife then hanging up.

Only one falling here. This should cause even republicans to vote to protect Mueller from removal. That will be Trump's death nail.

Assumption = a thing that is accepted as true without proof
Inference = a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning
Undergird = provide support or a firm basis for

"This is a classic example of a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning that provide support or a firm basis for much of modern cosmology". There, I fixed it for you.