Liberal Forum

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 12:42 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 12:42 pm

it will all come down to the note on which that trump did not recognize his own attorney's handwritting.

No, it will come down to evidence.

It has nothing at all to do with Trump recognizing anyone's handwriting. 

Have you not at LEAST watched Matlock or Perry Mason? How can you mistake Trump's recognition of handwriting as evidence in the Comey trial?
 
 

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 2:05 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 2:05 pm

yep, trumped up charges, not a pun.

When you find yourself defending the head of the FBI, turn in your fake liberal card and just admit that you're a neocon.
 

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 2:24 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 2:24 pm

---------------------------------But after Trump publicly called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to move more aggressively in her department’s pursuit of Comey and others, the former FBI director might have the facts needed to convince a judge to throw out the charges brought against him on Thursday.“It’s a better case for Comey, because the president won’t shut up,” said retired federal Judge John Jones. “And that’s admissible, so he’s got a fighting chance, I think, on vindictive prosecution.”

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/29/politics ... minal-case

Like the **** show in new york?

Where trump was tried by a *** hor who RAN FOR OFFICE ON A PROMISE TO GET TRUMP?

             

You go from blind to 20/20 vision on a dime, child. 
 

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 3:33 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 3:33 pm

name the cases.

AI Overview

Letitia James, who was elected New York Attorney General in 2018, campaigned on promises to investigate Donald Trump's business dealings. After taking office, she and her office did pursue multiple investigations and lawsuits against him. 
Key details from her 2018 campaign:

• Promise to investigate: James vowed to use "every area of the law to investigate President Trump and his business transactions and that of his family".
• "Con man" and "carnival barker" comments: At an event after winning the primary, she referred to Trump as a "con man" and "carnival barker," pledging to "shine a light into every dark corner of his real estate dealings".
• Focus on real estate: A significant focus of her promised investigation was Trump's real estate holdings in New York. 

Following her election, James' office opened investigations that ultimately led to legal action against Trump and the Trump Organization. 
 

Cannonpointer » 29 Sep 2025, 7:06 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 7:06 pm

No, it will come down to evidence.

It has nothing at all to do with Trump recognizing anyone's handwriting. 

Have you not at LEAST watched Matlock or Perry Mason? How can you mistake Trump's recognition of handwriting as evidence in the Comey trial?

• trump  did not recognize the handwriting of his own lawyer of 6 years

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

•  
• Hutchinson's testimony: In June 2022, before the House Select Committee on January 6, Hutchinson testified that she wrote a note at the direction of then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. The note contained a potential statement for Trump to release, urging rioters to leave the Capitol, with the word "illegally" crossed out.
• Trump's reaction: In a post on Truth Social, Trump criticized the note's handwriting, calling it "that of a Whacko".
• Conflicting claims: Shortly after Hutchinson's testimony, former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann claimed through a spokesperson that he, not Hutchinson, was the author of the note. The spokesperson stated that Herschmann had informed the committee that he wrote the note during a meeting on January 6, 2021.

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 7:39 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 7:39 pm

• trump  did not recognize the handwriting of his own lawyer of 6 years

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

•  
• Hutchinson's testimony: In June 2022, before the House Select Committee on January 6, Hutchinson testified that she wrote a note at the direction of then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. The note contained a potential statement for Trump to release, urging rioters to leave the Capitol, with the word "illegally" crossed out.
• Trump's reaction: In a post on Truth Social, Trump criticized the note's handwriting, calling it "that of a Whacko".
• Conflicting claims: Shortly after Hutchinson's testimony, former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann claimed through a spokesperson that he, not Hutchinson, was the author of the note. The spokesperson stated that Herschmann had informed the committee that he wrote the note during a meeting on January 6, 2021.

Are you quite deranged?

Do you REALLY expect ANYONE torecognize ANYONE'S **** handwriting?

In your vast experience with the relationship between Trump and his various attorneys, how many hand-written notes do you suppose Trump has seen from this particular one? Can you provide me with a number? A ballpark number? Is it more than ten?

In your opinion, should Trump immediately recognize the handwriting of ALL of his attorneys, or just this one?

Of all the perfectly legitimate complaints you could concoct against Donald J. Milhouse Trump, "He didn't recognize his own attorney's handwriting!" is likely the most insane that I could imagine. I don't recognize my own **** handwriting. 
 

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 7:39 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 7:39 pm

• trump  did not recognize the handwriting of his own lawyer of 6 years

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

•  
• Hutchinson's testimony: In June 2022, before the House Select Committee on January 6, Hutchinson testified that she wrote a note at the direction of then-Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. The note contained a potential statement for Trump to release, urging rioters to leave the Capitol, with the word "illegally" crossed out.
• Trump's reaction: In a post on Truth Social, Trump criticized the note's handwriting, calling it "that of a Whacko".
• Conflicting claims: Shortly after Hutchinson's testimony, former White House lawyer Eric Herschmann claimed through a spokesperson that he, not Hutchinson, was the author of the note. The spokesperson stated that Herschmann had informed the committee that he wrote the note during a meeting on January 6, 2021.

trump did not recognize his own senior advisor's handwriting

==================================================================Herschmann met Trump through his friend, Jared Kushner.[4] He served as one of President Trump's attorneys during his first impeachment trial in 2019 and 2020, giving several presentations in the U.S. Senate chamber.[5][6]In August 2020, he left his firm to join the White House with the title Senior Advisor to the President, with a portfolio described as "hazy" by The New York Times

Cannonpointer » 29 Sep 2025, 7:46 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 7:46 pm

Are you quite deranged?

Do you REALLY expect ANYONE torecognize ANYONE'S **** handwriting?

In your vast experience with the relationship between Trump and his various attorneys, how many hand-written notes do you suppose Trump has seen from this particular one? Can you provide me with a number? A ballpark number? Is it more than ten?

In your opinion, should Trump immediately recognize the handwriting of ALL of his attorneys, or just this one?

Of all the perfectly legitimate complaints you could concoct against Donald J. Milhouse Trump, "He didn't recognize his own attorney's handwriting!" is likely the most insane that I could imagine. I don't recognize my own **** handwriting.

---------------------------------------
He served as one of President Trump's attorneys during his first impeachment trial in 2019 and 2020, giving several presentations in the U.S. Senate chamber.[5][6]In August 2020, he left his firm to join the White House with the title Senior Advisor to the President, with a portfolio described as "hazy" by The New York Times

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 7:50 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 7:50 pm

---------------------------------------
He served as one of President Trump's attorneys during his first impeachment trial in 2019 and 2020, giving several presentations in the U.S. Senate chamber.[5][6]In August 2020, he left his firm to join the White House with the title Senior Advisor to the President, with a portfolio described as "hazy" by The New York Times

Maybe his handwriting is hazy, too.

You have ignored a critical question. How many times do you suppose that Trump had seen this attorney's handwriting, and what is the basis of that assumption?

You've asked the board to consider Trump a liar in the matter - present some evidence.You must have SOME evidence, to become so expectant that everyone will follow you in seeing the claim as an obvious lie. How many times? On what do you base that supposition?

 

Cannonpointer » 29 Sep 2025, 7:57 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 7:57 pm

Maybe his handwriting is hazy, too.

You have ignored a critical question. How many times do you suppose that Trump had seen this attorney's handwriting, and what is the basis of that assumption?

You've asked the board to consider Trump a liar in the matter - present some evidence.You must have SOME evidence, to become so expectant that everyone will follow you in seeing the claim as an obvious lie. How many times? On what do you base that supposition?

he would have seen his handwriting many times and would have recognized it immediately.

 

BuckNaked » 29 Sep 2025, 6:47 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 6:47 pm

the videos from his testimony

Direct me to a lie.

 

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 8:04 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 8:04 pm

he would have seen his handwriting many times and would have recognized it immediately.
 

He "would have" - that is conditional language, and you did not tell me the conditions. 

I guess that leaves me to make up the conditions. Okay:

If this were a universe wherein most professionals turn their work in handwritten rather than type-written, Trump would have seen his attorney's handwriting many times and would have recognized it immediately.

I guess this is synthesis. But it leaves us with a quetion: Since this is NOT such an alternate universe, WTF are you on about?

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6ukCrVK-ZL0

Blackvegetable » 29 Sep 2025, 8:49 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 8:49 pm

Direct me to a lie. So that I can double down on it.

FTFY, fruitcake. 

roadkill » 29 Sep 2025, 9:14 am » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 9:14 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfunazLSZcE

GUILTY AS SIN !!

AND THAT, doesn't even include the ADMISSION by Comey when he SET UP the President of the United States, Donald Trump, when he LIED to Ttump about a briefing (Comey scheduled soon after Trump was sworn in)... but in REALITY was just setting Trump up with and illegal STING OPERATION:  where Trump was questioned, recorded, with questionable security and UTTER DIS-honesty... AT A TIME when HE SHOULD have ALREADY been treating Donald Trump as HIS PRESIDENT... BUT, he was treating him as a CRIMINAL SHEEP that Comey was leading to its SLAUGHTER...  BUT, Trump survived ALL of that... and NOW, it's James Comey who is in HUGE TROUBLE, and...

This BASTARD needs to be TRIED, CONVICTED, and SHOT !!
 

Cannonpointer » 29 Sep 2025, 7:57 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 7:57 pm

Maybe his handwriting is hazy, too.

You have ignored a critical question. How many times do you suppose that Trump had seen this attorney's handwriting, and what is the basis of that assumption?

You've asked the board to consider Trump a liar in the matter - present some evidence.You must have SOME evidence, to become so expectant that everyone will follow you in seeing the claim as an obvious lie. How many times? On what do you base that supposition?

many times
=================================

• Attorney-client privilege: This legal doctrine safeguards confidential communications between a lawyer and their client for the purpose of seeking legal advice. The privilege belongs to the client, but lawyers' notes are protected because they reflect the legal opinions and thoughts of the attorney. The purpose is to encourage open and honest communication between the client and counsel, without fear that conversations will be used against them.
• Work-product doctrine: This protection covers documents and other materials that a lawyer prepares in anticipation of litigation. This can include memos, correspondence, and notes. 

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 9:52 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 9:52 pm

many times
=================================

• Attorney-client privilege: This legal doctrine safeguards confidential communications between a lawyer and their client for the purpose of seeking legal advice. The privilege belongs to the client, but lawyers' notes are protected because they reflect the legal opinions and thoughts of the attorney. The purpose is to encourage open and honest communication between the client and counsel, without fear that conversations will be used against them.
• Work-product doctrine: This protection covers documents and other materials that a lawyer prepares in anticipation of litigation. This can include memos, correspondence, and notes. 

"Many" times. 

I think I used that word in my question. "Many."

But I put the word HOW in front of it - as in, HOW many.

And I asked for your evidence. We all knew that attorney-client privilege was a thing. Is that REALLY evidence?

We did not know that attorney-client privilege required the client to study the attorney's handwriting.

I will ask again - HOW "many" times? More than three? Bigger than a bread box?

Would you guess maybe 500 times? Just give us a ball park.

Have YOU ever had an attorney? If so, did you receive handwritten work product? 

Has ANYONE on this board EVER received handwritten work product from their attorney?
 
 

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/29/politics ... minal-case

ConservativeWave » 29 Sep 2025, 9:41 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 9:41 pm

GUILTY AS SIN !!

AND THAT, doesn't even include the ADMISSION by Comey when he SET UP the President of the United States, Donald Trump, when he LIED to Ttump about a briefing (Comey scheduled soon after Trump was sworn in)... but in REALITY was just setting Trump up with and illegal STING OPERATION:  where Trump was questioned, recorded, with questionable security and UTTER DIS-honesty... AT A TIME when HE SHOULD have ALREADY been treating Donald Trump as HIS PRESIDENT... BUT, he was treating him as a CRIMINAL SHEEP that Comey was leading to its SLAUGHTER...  BUT, Trump survived ALL of that... and NOW, it's James Comey who is in HUGE TROUBLE, and...

This BASTARD needs to be TRIED, CONVICTED, and SHOT !!

-------------------------------------------------------------As President Donald Trump publicly pressures the Justice Department to bring criminal cases against his perceived enemies, legal experts say former FBI Director James Comey could attempt a rarely successful legal maneuver that allows judges to throw out charges that were unfairly brought.Requests to dismiss cases based on selective or vindictive prosecutions face extremely high hurdles in court and are overwhelmingly unsuccessful. Trump himself and Hunter Biden both tried (and failed) to employ the tactic in recent years.But after Trump publicly called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to move more aggressively in her department’s pursuit of Comey and others, the former FBI director might have the facts needed to convince a judge to throw out the charges brought against him on Thursday.“It’s a better case for Comey, because the president won’t shut up,” said retired federal Judge John Jones. “And that’s admissible, so he’s got a fighting chance, I think, on vindictive prosecution.”

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 10:12 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 10:12 pm

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/29/politics ... minal-case

I'll wait.

Last Ichecked, CNN tells me I shouldtake the covid vax, and little boys can magically become little girls, simply by declaring it so.

YOU go ahead and trust CNN. They never said anything about that negro she-beast promising to go after trump as part of her campaign - even though doing socertainly prejudiced any prosecution that she engineered. If she could do that, then a few utterances from Trump are not going to mean **** regarding the prosecution of Comey. 
 

jerrab » 29 Sep 2025, 10:24 pm » wrote: ↑

29 Sep 2025, 10:24 pm

-------------------------------------------------------------As President Donald Trump publicly pressures the Justice Department to bring criminal cases against his perceived enemies, legal experts say former FBI Director James Comey could attempt a rarely successful legal maneuver that allows judges to throw out charges that were unfairly brought.Requests to dismiss cases based on selective or vindictive prosecutions face extremely high hurdles in court and are overwhelmingly unsuccessful. Trump himself and Hunter Biden both tried (and failed) to employ the tactic in recent years.But after Trump publicly called on Attorney General Pam Bondi to move more aggressively in her department’s pursuit of Comey and others, the former FBI director might have the facts needed to convince a judge to throw out the charges brought against him on Thursday.“It’s a better case for Comey, because the president won’t shut up,” said retired federal Judge John Jones. “And that’s admissible, so he’s got a fighting chance, I think, on vindictive prosecution.”

Crap and tripe. 

I can get a "legal expert" tosay anything I want. Just drag a speaking gig on CNN through a trailer park...