That was not an answer to your questions, Askholio.Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 7:30 am » wrote: ↑ No..
That's NOT what he's arguing.
Until you have some clue what you are talking about, don't talk.
As a condition, he had to put up more money.
Of course not...Huey » 18 May 2026, 7:34 am » wrote: ↑ That was not an answer to your questions, Askholio.
It was in response to this:
Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 7:35 am » wrote: ↑ Of course not...
You always run from those, Quimmie...
Run? No. Refuse to answer yours until you start answering? Yes.Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 7:35 am » wrote: ↑ Of course not...
You always run from those, Quimmie...
Yes..Huey » 18 May 2026, 7:37 am » wrote: ↑ Run? No. Refuse to answer yours until you start answering? Yes.
No...you are a chronic liar, Quimmie.until you start answering? Yes
This isn't about me, or you. It is about the appeals court temporarily blocking the payment.Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 7:39 am » wrote: ↑ Yes..
Always run.
No...you are a chronic liar, Quimmie.
No...it wouldn't block itself.Huey » 18 May 2026, 7:41 am » wrote: ↑ This isn't about me, or you. It is about the appeals court temporarily blocking the payment.
Semantics. Go argue with the media.Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 7:50 am » wrote: ↑ No...it wouldn't block itself.
It stays its order.
This is why Stupid People can't have nice things...
Words have meaning....English has many....it allows for precision.
Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑ Words have meaning....English has many....it allows for precision.
The court wouldn't "block" itself.
There's no need for blocking if both parties agree. There's no debate of "merits"....in fact, there's no assurance SCOTUS will hear it.
Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 7:29 am » wrote: ↑ How about the 2nd paragraph of your citation, *******.
Trump is heading to the justices after the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit rejected his presidential immunity claims and other efforts to avoid paying the sum late last month.
Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 7:23 am » wrote: ↑ These are jury verdicts...
You're a slack jawed rube.
Semantics, Go argue with the media.Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑ Words have meaning....English has many....it allows for precision.
The court wouldn't "block" itself.
There's no need for blocking if both parties agree. There's no debate of "merits"....in fact, there's no assurance SCOTUS will hear it.
Exactly as they had the final say in BOTH the verdict AND award…the judge had NOTHING to do with either, therefore interjecting his stupid **** opinion was based solely on his snowflakey feefees…
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom Both can be appealed.ROG62 » 18 May 2026, 8:50 am » wrote: ↑ Exactly as they had the final say in BOTH the verdict AND award…
Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 8:58 am » wrote: ↑ Both can be appealed.
When they are appealed, the jury is not reconvened.
The judge speaks for the Court, which is why Team Grifty directed the petition you insist on ignoring to Judge Kaplan for response.
When so doing, it must provide a reason why The Rapist shouldn't have to pay what the jury awarded.
No...you are a chronic liar, Quimmie.
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom Did the “appeal” change the verdict?Blackvegetable » 18 May 2026, 8:58 am » wrote: ↑ Both can be appealed.
When they are appealed, the jury is not reconvened.
The judge speaks for the Court, which is why Team Grifty directed the petition you insist on ignoring to Judge Kaplan for response.
When so doing, it must provide a reason why The Rapist shouldn't have to pay what the jury awarded.
JuCo 5 percenter...72
“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA
"Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom ROG62 » 18 May 2026, 9:35 am » wrote: ↑ Did the “appeal” change the verdict?
Did the “appeal” change the basis for the award?
Did the prosecution or defense “appeal”?