Jon Stewart returning to host the Daily Show
- Thread starter Al-O-Meter
- Start date
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Thanks JazzMan4Life
John Stewart nails it once again.
Great watch
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
Hard disagree on that one. I like Jon Stewart a lot but his take on this one is spectacularly uninformed. The banks who loaned Trump the money didn't take Trump's word for any valuations. Lenders ALWAYS do their own due diligence, and they did in this instance, and their due diligence was correct, and they made a ton of money because all of the loan was paid back with interest. Second, the loan to Trump didn't starve the entire market of lendable cash to deny other borrowers. Jon Stewart built his whole narrative of there being hidden victims based on these two moronic misconceptions.
The government is misusing the system of justice in a practice being termed as "lawfare" and it is doing real measurable damage in public trust. That is why the appeals court has mysteriously decided to jump in to stay the ruling and reduce the bond requirement after they previously said they would not do either.
SteakNEggs
Well-Known Member
For once I wish fish would use his own words rather than Hollywood
The banks literally said there was no fraud and that they'd do business with Trump again.
Not one person or bank was defrauded. Not one. The judge literally fabricated his own numbers on what Trump is worth and there's a reason he denied a jury.
In fact, the bankers’ testimony was such a boon to Trump’s defense that his lawyers asked the judge to issue an immediate decision in their favor.
But the trial judge — who has often butted heads with Trump and his legal team, and who already found Trump’s business liable for fraud — did not appear convinced.
Trump defense points to bankers as proof business dealings had ‘no victim’
Former President Trump and Deutsche Bank’s years-long symbiotic relationship came to the forefront of his New York civil fraud trial this week when top executives who once loaned the former preside…
www.google.com
Last edited:
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
I think most people start with who is targeted and work backwards. I think it has always been this way.
Many people today think it is okay what is being done to Trump because Trump is bad and deserves to have bad things happen to him.
Many people in 1930’s Germany thought it was okay what is being done to the Jews because the Jews are bad and deserve to have bad things happen to them.
Many people in the 1820’s Antebellum South thought it was okay what is being done to ancestrally African people because the ancestrally African people are inferior and belong in their subservient station.
People today are as they always were. Only the labels change. I’m not saying Trump did nothing wrong ever, but in this case where people are cheering this crazy level of government imposed punishment in an instance where the government is incapable of finding a single victim, it is easy to guess what side those people would have been on in 1930’s Germany or the 1820’s Antebellum South. Yes, the people cheering this are the baddies.
SteakNEggs
Well-Known Member
I would just like to know how a half of a billion dollars is not against the 8th amendment. The bond system is not supposed to be used as a punishment like fish craves but as a means to makes sure said person does not skip out. We literally have Letitia James who campaigned off of saying she was going to "get Trump" saying she was going to literally steal Trumps assets. She was bragging about this. Loud... Does fish have 12% of his total wealth just in a random bank account? I sure don't. Most people don't. It is the very definition of cruel and unusual punishment. Did they allow Trump an extra 30 days? No. They were being spiteful. Remember... The judge also based that number on valuing Mar A Lago at 18 million dollars lol. That property was worth that much over 100 years ago. Let's also not forget how the judge also bypassed and ignored the appeals court on multiple issues. It's crystal clear why the Judge also refused to allow this to go to a Jury. He knows damn well there is no case here.
Does fish, red, anyone address any of this? Nope. They will ignore this because they have no logical answer.
I mean... Even The View(stooping to Fishes level using actors) who hates Trump with a passion are calling out this blatant and obvious election rigging.
Last edited:
Donald Trump is a criminal facing the results of criminal behavior.
I was unaware you thought being Jewish or black as inherently criminal.
The judge calculated this mount matched what Trump gained by lying. Losing what you gained illegally can not be excessive.
SteakNEggs
Well-Known Member
No he didn't. This is why the appeals court lowered it. Derp... Because it was excessive.
But by all means create another conspiracy how Trump is in bed with the appeals court or something.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
Every high profile politician is targeted relentlessly by their adversaries. This is not a new phenomenon, in fact I'd suggest it is inherent to the way our system works.
People can say "they all do it" but the fact is that they either don't do it or that they do it better.
Trump is a clown and he does clown **** in clown ways. That's a big reason I don't think he's fit to be our President. He isn't competent.
SteakNEggs
Well-Known Member
Care to show what high-profile politicians arrested their opponent? Care to provide where they illegally took them off of ballots? If it's not new lets see it. This only happens in the most corrupt and fascist regimes in history. This is not normal.
They lowered the bond. The penalty is unchanged. Also, the appeals court did not give an 8th Amendment justification.