Comments by "BigKandRtv" (@BigKandRtv) on "Jonathan Turley: 'This case is quickly becoming incomprehensible'" video.

  1. To the OP: I thought every indictment HELPED reelect Trump. Did that change?
    6
  2. Being an attorney requires intelligence. Being a successful attorney? Even more so. Being elected DA requires the prior two, PLUS the ability to network and campaign successfully. And bringing charges against a former US President requires a level of precision above and beyond all others, ESPECIALLY if those charges are going to survive the pre-trial attempts to get them dismissed. The cases brought by people of color have all survived the attempts to have them dismissed. And again, such success requires considerable expertise. Hence the number of cases "brought by chocolate people" is high.
    6
  3. This week there is a Colorado woman who is in the news. She is in an "online romance" with "Keanu Reeves". As you probably guessed, it isn't really Keanu. This scammer keeps telling her to buy and send gift cards, and she keeps doing it. Nothing can dissuade her from the scam- not her friends, family, even the local news channel sent reporters to try and talk sense to her. She is unmoved. Keanu is emailing her. Keanu LOVES her. Keanu NEEDS her support. The more people try to show her Keanu isn't her online boyfriend, the more she feels her self-worth is tied to this lie she fell for. If the romance is a lie, her sense of self-worth drops to zero.
    5
  4.  @adriantam2573  "we know what there all black" When you learn English, try again with your inquiry. Until then, you are a long way away from understanding a black District Attorney who has the intellect to successfully bring a former US President to trial.
    4
  5.  @adriantam2573  Thank you for taking it slowly with me. I have the indictment open, and the answer to your first question is §175.10,
    4
  6.  @keithm9337  no, I haven’t watched Turley’s video so I don’t even know what it says. But I am accusing you of refusing to discuss the actual indictment. You want to use someone else’s arguments rather than your own. Frankly, I think that you are selling yourself short. Based on your posts Ibelieve that you could find, read, and understand the indictment. Don’t give up on yourself, you can do this!
    4
  7.  @keithm9337  Sorry, I am quoting what the indictment says: (New York) "Penal Law §175.10 FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE". For a crime to be "First Degree", it is a felony. The idea that a "local prosecutor" cannot bring felony charges should be false even to the most disinterested person in this country. We all know prosecutors can bring felony charges. And NO WHERE does the indictment make a claim that the charges are changed to avoid the statute of limitations. You can keep talking about your opinion, I am going to talk about facts.
    4
  8.  @cathybostwick405  You wonder the same? Maybe try reading the indictment for yourself. You won't be in the dark after that. I have read many of your posts, and I am confident you can read and understand this for yourself. Then you can know the answer as to why this has not been dismissed in spite of what the TV is saying. I believe in you!
    4
  9.  @adriantam2573  I am replying to you. Can you not see it? Subsection 175.10 Can you see that?
    3
  10.  @keithm9337  Video by Johnathan Turley? Why not talk about the actual indictment? I assume you know how to find it and read it right? Why rely on a talking head to tell you what it says?
    3
  11.  @thomaschamberlain9811  And that "chocolate" is bringing a US President to justice. I find it funny that so many people are upset that black people (3 out of 4 prosecutors) are the ones who have the smarts and guts to hold an ex-president accountable. Kinda shatters that "superior" crap, doesn't it? You should just rip that superiority band-aid off now. You will thank me later.
    3
  12.  @adriantam2573  Where did you go? Are you still reading the indictment? Or are you finished with that, and running around in a panic now? Remember: Facts don't care about your feelings.
    3
  13.  @SocraticMutt  I am working on the assumption that they don’t believe they are capable of reading and understanding the indictment. I believe they are short-selling themselves, and they COULD do it if they try. 👍🏻
    3
  14.  @keithm9337  No, you read the indictment and tell me what YOU think. There is nothing between you and the indictment but air and opportunity. Why refuse to read it? The quality of your posts makes me believe you are absolutely able to read AND understand the indictment. You can do it!!!👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
    3
  15. Do you ever get tired of being wrong?
    3
  16.  @keithm9337  Why not read the indictment YOURSELF? Why do you think you need someone to tell you what it says? If you can’t read comments on YouTube, you can read an indictment.
    2
  17.  @keithm9337  Can’t find the indictment? LOL
    2
  18.  @adriantam2573  I cited the STATE LAW. The indictment charges violations of STATE LAW. You really should try reading the indictment yourself.
    2
  19.  @grahamshereston2550  All three predictions are coming true? Maybe you need to tell trump that. He is without $80 million he paid to bond the Carol verdict so he could appeal.
    2
  20. For a golden retriever, sure. For humans who READ THE DAILY COURT TRANSCRIPT, it's not hard to follow.
    2
  21. Most people are reading the daily court transcript for themselves, rather than letting some talking head with heavy makeup tell them what to think.
    2
  22.  @adriantam2573  Did you finally read the indictment(s) for yourself?
    1
  23.  @harryfarber6435  You sound like the kind of person who still believes the '"red wave" is just around the corner. See you in November, Hairy Fob.
    1
  24.  @sabaha4637  Was the "red wave" rigged?
    1
  25.  @ecstanton  If he didn’t go to the trials, they would arrest the MAGA who had nothing to do with it. 🤣🤣🤣 They are really after the common folk, Trump is just standing in their way!
    1
  26.  @alanakafang6143  What case?
    1
  27.  @alanakafang6143  We don’t need to appeal, we can tell that you saw yourself in the Colorado woman’s story. If that bothers you then it’s on you not me.
    1
  28.  @RICO-2024  There was an appeal to dismiss these charges already heard by the court of appeals and denied. In fact, this case alone has survived 11 attempts by trump's attorneys to delay or have it completely dismissed. It has gotten to the point where ALL of the news outlets I listen to are getting at least some parts of these cases wrong. Left wing, right wing, chicken wing, it doesn't matter. There is just so much happening with trump that none of the news outlets are getting all the details correct. I have a login to P.A.C.E.R. and I can get any (non-sealed) transcript or filing. Being retired means I have time to read things that interest me. Cheers!
    1
  29.  @alanakafang6143  “A hit dog will holler.” Thanks for indicating you got my point.
    1
  30.  @rags8855  They are in office because of DEI? Or are they in office because more people voted for them?
    1
  31.  @adriantam2573  why are you trying so hard to avoid looking at what Trump is charged with? Your “race” has no impact on what those indictments contain. You can find them, you can read them, and you can understand them. I believe in you. 👍🏻
    1
  32.  @geraldboesen5037  The indictments are not, so why don’t we debate them instead of my opinion? Can you do that? Put aside your option, mine, and all the talking heads we have listened to. Let’s both pull up the indictments, and discuss what you see that is wrong.
    1
  33. If it's an illiterate in-bred MAGA against these members of the judicial system, my money is on Bragg (no "s", dingus) and team.
    1
  34.  @ecstanton  Thanks to Biden, they all have jobs now.
    1