Liberal Forum

*Huey » 14 Jul 2025, 9:47 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 9:47 am

I don’t give a **** w hat you read.  The ABC settlement as well as the jury verdict says you’re a **** moron.

16 million cha…….ching

RebelGator » 14 Jul 2025, 11:21 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 11:21 am

Innocent until proven guilty, you have proven nothing.

It is exactly because she HAS proven it that she's up 2 million.

Blackvegetable » 14 Jul 2025, 1:34 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 1:34 pm

It is exactly because she HAS proven it that she's up 2 million.

Not for rape.  For once in your miserable bullied existence admit you are wrong, ArmsLength.

Common Since Conceived inhabiting space here v. Common Sense Corrupted after birth now.

*Huey » 15 Jul 2025, 5:11 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 5:11 am

Not for rape.  For once in your miserable bullied existence admit you are wrong, ArmsLength.

Your feefees are irrelevant. 
Argue with the presiding judge.

 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 5:36 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 5:36 am

Your feefees are irrelevant. 
Argue with the presiding judge.

Shrug.  You argue with the Jury AND with ABC.  ABC has 16 million reasons to say your are wrong.

*Huey » 15 Jul 2025, 6:39 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 6:39 am

Shrug.  You argue with the Jury 

Who determines what the jury said?


You're a **** idiot. 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 6:48 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 6:48 am

Who determines what the jury said?

You're a **** idiot.

The jury.


T

*Huey » 15 Jul 2025, 6:53 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 6:53 am

The jury.


T

You should read Judge Kaplan's response, so you stop confusing the "special verdict" with the jury verdict.

 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 6:48 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 6:48 am

Who determines what the jury said?
 

Now stfu mary

Jurors are responsible for deciding on the facts in issue at a trial, determining if the defendant committed the crime, and delivering a verdict of guilty or not guilty. Judges act as referees, ruling on issues of law and determining which evidence may be considered by the jury123.
 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 11:36 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 11:36 am

You should read Judge Kaplan's response, so you stop confusing the "special verdict" with the jury verdict.

Send your concerns to ABC.  They have 16 million reason to benefit from your legal expertise. 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 11:36 am » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 11:36 am

You should read Judge Kaplan's response, so you stop confusing the "special verdict" with the jury verdict.

As a legal matter, could ABC have won the case? Yes, though there was hardly a guarantee. The network pointed to the somewhat convoluted procedural history of the cases involving Carroll, including when the presiding judge said that, despite the definition under New York law, Carroll had proven that “Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’” But those comments were not binding for the Florida judge overseeing the ABC case, and they would not have been binding for a Florida jury.


https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ ... s-00195761

*Huey » 15 Jul 2025, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 12:49 pm

As a legal matter, could ABC have won the case? 

the abc matter is entirely irrelevant. 


 

*Huey » 15 Jul 2025, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 12:20 pm

Send your concerns to ABC.  

it has nothing to do with the verdict.


You people are morons.

MR-7 » 15 Jul 2025, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 12:05 pm

Now stfu mary

 

Answer the question,  or **** off

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 1:07 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 1:07 pm

Answer the question,  or **** off

      Oh the irony. Once again. He demands answers while evading them. 

Rules don't apply to narcissists.

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 1:07 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 1:07 pm

Answer the question,  or **** off

I did...it's the very first line   
 

Blackvegetable » 12 Jul 2025, 1:22 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Jul 2025, 1:22 pm

As a narcissist, I am obligated to demand answers to my questions while ignoring the ones I am asked. I also have no **** clue what survivorship bias is evidenced by my incessant evasion toward Vegas's question.

Yeah, no **** ^^^

1. "I posted my definition of survivorship bias..." To which I will reply with the usual and the video. 

Either A, B, C, or D.

Let me break this down for your dumb ***. You see the 4 options to the question? Every option includes your definition, but only one is an example of survivorship bias. Your definition was half assed. Like all of your content.

When a sample fails to reflect "mortality" in the population being examined.

or

"Sampling error"

Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors
 

Blackvegetable » 15 Jul 2025, 1:05 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 1:05 pm

the abc matter is entirely irrelevant.

This is about worthless to continue.......

*Huey » 15 Jul 2025, 1:26 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Jul 2025, 1:26 pm

This is about worthless to continue.......

Yea.....because you don't know anything about the jury decision OR Stephanopoulos' error.