Comments by "justgivemethetruth" (@justgivemethetruth) on "LegalEagle" channel.

  1. 10:14 - Did you just say "for all intents and purposes the Senate is the Judge Judy and executioner"? This is great, thank you.
    5
  2. I bet it echoes around for a long time in all the empty space.
    4
  3. As odd as Trump is, his followers are even weirder. Why would any American support this moron?
    4
  4. I am still unclear about whether Donald Trump can run for office again? - if he is impeached, as he has been, my understanding is that he can run again. - if he is convicted by the Senate, it is unclear. - if the Senate convicted Trump, and votes on it, only then can he be forbidden to run again.
    2
  5. Hilarious. Except for the history of the theater fires ... that is pretty sad. Do you mean recently CONSRIPTED soldiers? It sounded like you said recently constricted soldiers? Anyway, this is an important topic that it is about time Americans got right. Schenck was probably right since WWI was a totally pointless murderous war that led directly to WWII and killed something like 10 million people - and the military leaders did not care about marching soldier who had no choice out in front of machine guns to get mowed down.
    2
  6. I think hate speech should be regulated in some way. I am not exactly sure how, but a lot can ride on speech, and when you inject hate, fear, anxiety, you are causing the other person to be less free. Maybe this is a bad analogy, but it's like if the Second Amendment tells me I can have a gun, and carry it around, and I and around and point it at people, not shooting or even threatening anyone, the mere fact of having a gun point at me or you infringed on our rights of security.
    2
  7. ​ @nathanjora7627  I am not sure I get your analogy, but I have to say, the way you phrase your comment was beautiful. Very civil. On YouTube here I don't see nearly enough comments expressed like that - like really trying to get at and define and perhaps solve a problem. My point is that the Constitution and Free Speech have a purpose, a context. ( This is purely my own idea/feeling ) That is, the purpose of speech should be about communicating political and ideological concepts and ideas to sustain and better the society and the country. Speech should not be a weapon to intimidate people, or make them feel bad, unwelcome, inferior, or like they are not full citizens in an egalitarian society. So, in terms of getting ideas across in the "marketplace of ideas" for the purpose of perfecting our union, what is important is not someone's right to transmit hate, but the right of a person with ideas to both express those ideas in a forum, and have those ideas heard and processed by other citizens. Anything that degrades or precludes that right is against society, and ultimately against the individual as well - and that is what needs to be protected and perfected - not someone's right to project hate onto others either individually or collectively. I am not suggesting laws and penaltiies for minor speech infractions, but when it comes to things like using LOUD speech, or flooding a forum with noise or lies, or insults or bad feelings - that we should take that very seriously. I feel like it is OK to censor those on social media who are anti-social. The argument by the Right that there should be no censorship or that they are preferentially picked out for censorship or cancellation is only because the so-called Right cannot exist without this factor of hate and intimidation, and they use that more than the so-called Left. So when you compare the two on a superficial level, the Right has more strikes against them in forums not because of bias, but because of their dependence on intimidation and negative reinforcement. Does that clarify what I said or meant, and does it make any sense?
    2
  8. > We also invented putting pineapple on pizza Death penalty!
    2
  9. Great Channel, thanks for not quitting
    1
  10. This signature matching crap needs to be gotten rid of. I always vote in person, so I don't know if they do signature matching, but my signature looks different every time I sign my name.
    1
  11. How does this funny haircut guy know what Luigi believes?
    1
  12. LOL, you're a good son.
    1
  13. If we could just get rid of the a-oles
    1
  14. Objection: the cleanliness of push up soap dispensers is irrelevant and immaterial. Great premise for a YT channel. I always heard that you cannot just get up and walk around in a real court? If not, they should probably allow that now that we know that sitting is so bad for our health. ;-) What would bother me if I were a member of the jury is when Saul says "never to be repeated, lapse of judgement". That would make me think, well, if we let them off this time how do we know they will take this seriously and never have another lapse of judgement. Judgement is formed by pain and adversity. I am not sure I buy that argument or that it would not make me more willing to convict.
    1
  15. Come on, Republicans that do not support lies and faked evidence are not real Republicans, so there were not real Republican poll workers if they did not complain, lie and fake evidence. Q.E.D. ;-)
    1
  16. Cool quote.
    1
  17. The movie "Marriage Story" with Scarlett Johansson and Adam Driver has 3 major lawyer characters in it. I wonder if you have seen the movie and would have a comment about it, or make a video about it?
    1
  18. Great channel, thanks, not so great suit coat.
    1
  19. Seems like they want this guy to go away forever, or die.
    1
  20. "There are no heroes here in this story" ... truer words were never spoken.
    1
  21. Good video on an important topic.
    1
  22. Your face is not as stupid as you seem to think.
    1
  23. If terrorism is about intimidating units of government into affecting their policies ... why is Elon Musk not guilty of terrorism?
    1
  24. 1:36 - Hahahahaha, joking back!
    1