Comments by "duncan smith" (@duncansmith7562) on "Forbes Breaking News" channel.

  1. Blinken lives in a fantasy world. Russia has won and NATO is a whimpering wreck.
    2
  2. it's thanks to Tucker that we have evidence that a so-called insurrection features Capitol police escorting a the Q Anon shaman into various sacrosanct chambers. when was the last insurrection that had law and order acting as tour guides to "rioters"? ever?
    1
  3. John and Fani, such a close father and daughter relationship, so close that John has no idea who his daughter is dating and has no clue which country his daughter is in when she leaves town. they really care for each other.
    1
  4. there is no evidence that any extra CO2 man pumps into the atmosphere has any significant effect on climates. it's all supposition in an effort to control our behaviors.
    1
  5. only the numbers in the 7 swing states matter, so this is all blabber as it talks about things nationally. Trump is ahead in the swing states.
    1
  6. "illegal invasion" which laws were broken by Russia invading Ukraine as opposed to which laws were respected by USA invading Afghanistan?
    1
  7.  @JerryNeusbaum  no one said that Trump was the president, genius.
    1
  8.  @JerryNeusbaum  "genius" is spelt "g e n i u s", genius!
    1
  9. Lloyd Austin, the epitome of what goes wrong with diversity hires and affirmative action.
    1
  10. MTG hits the nail on the head. Ukraune being sacrificed for no reason
    1
  11. the plea deals are excellent news for Trump. his co-defendants get a slap on the wrist, they take the rap and testify Trump was no conspirator. Willis is getting further away from her objective, not closer.
    1
  12.  @blackjesus804  not true. they agreed to "testify honestly" and that's it. what they say when they are on the stand will be entirely up to them. you'll see.
    1
  13. she is the best example of the horrible reality of where diversity, equity and inclusion leads us.
    1
  14. Lindsey Graham is clueless about the severe limitations of US arms production.
    1
  15. Only a coincidence that this version of events is announced the day after Scholz and Biden chat about things in DC. So, now we are supposed to believe that a rich Ukrainian dude hires a yacht and explosives in Poland and beats Joe Biden to do the deed that Joe Biden already promised he would do?
    1
  16. the problem is you started moving the ball forward towards your own line, you dope!
    1
  17.  @godspharaoh987  no one who is white is ever hired as a diversity hire or due to affirmative action.
    1
  18. it's such wonderful news that the US now has no deficit, and has a budget surplus that allows to fund wars overseas.
    1
  19. what's the point in testifying when the democrat judge and democrat jury already decided Trump is guilty? waste of time.
    1
  20.  @MikeW165  it's the judge that is biased. look at who his family donates to and who his daughter campaigns for. a conflicted, biased judge. FACTS! any jury in Manhattan is going to be pro Democrat. FACT. Looks like you need to learn the facts.
    1
  21.  @MikeW165  If Judge Cannon has a son or daughter that is an activist and campaigner for the Republican party, and Judge Cannon has donated to or has a spouse that has donated to the Republican party then, yes, clearly, such a judge is conflicted and cannot possibly be impartial in handling a case involving Trump, nor indeed any political figure of high standing. Judges must be seen to be above party politics. Period. Same goes for Judge MacAfee in the Fani Willis hearing in Atlanta. At least in FL you will get a jury that is pretty evenly split in its political leanings.
    1
  22.  @MikeW165  Also, keep in mind, there is, as yet, no trial in FL.
    1
  23.  @MikeW165  yeah, the crime is naming a legal expense as a legal expense while your last name is Trump. It's a serious crime in NY, but nowhere else.
    1
  24.  @MikeW165  yeah, no one else has ever been prosecuted for this, but suddenly in election year, the case is brought to court. nothing political at all. then again, maybe it took 10 years for Cohen to get his story straight.
    1
  25.  @MikeW165  99% of the time there is no need to set any political bias aside, because the vast majority of cases do not involve politics or politicians. the job of a judge is to be referee. but in the very few cases where a judge has clearly a political bias that would impact his/her ability to be a fair referee, that judge needs to step aside. Merchan should have recused himself. anyone who doesn't see that is just happy with prejudice and corruption to permeate the court.
    1
  26.  @MikeW165  a gag order on the defendant but on no one else involved in the trial is such a horrendous violation of impartiality and legal ethics that it should mean disbarment of this activist judge, and you know it.
    1
  27.  @MikeW165  clearly you have a problem with reading comprehension. As I said, if a judge has donated to anyone involved in a trial, that judge should recuse herself/himself, and failing to do that, be removed. It is impossible to seem to be fair if you have donated to a party involved in the case. MacAfee in Atlanta is a case in point.
    1
  28.  @MikeW165  The difference is that Cannon may yet be removed before any trial, we have not gotten to that point yet.
    1
  29.  @MikeW165  just because something has never happened before doesn't mean it must be right or acceptable. it's about time the US legal system woke up and saw how disgustingly unfair trials and hearings can be when a conflicted judge is involved. For political figures in a trial, a judge who has refused to donate to anyone would be the only way to be seen to be impartial. period.
    1
  30.  @MikeW165  when you pay a lawyer to arrange an NDA, it is 100% a legal expense. it's done all the time. all the other people who have arranged an NDA, how do they account for it? and why have none of them been taken to court?
    1
  31.  @MikeW165  a gag order on the defendant but on no one else is political bias.
    1
  32.  @MikeW165  the judge is conflicted by his family's close affiliations with the Democrat party, and gagging a defendant is such a horrendous violation of the First Amendment that Judge Merchan needs to be removed, and go back to law school.
    1
  33.  @MikeW165  she hasn't recused herself because she doesn't have to, but she should, if she wants the world to perceive the proceedings as fair. I have made this point three times now, but you seem confused. Are you 12 years old?
    1
  34.  @MikeW165  false. lawyers and their legal fees can be charged via a retainer fee, or per case on a one off basis. If you really believe that all NDAs are handled by lawyers on a retainer fee, and not one single NDA has ever happened as a one off case, handled by a lawyer NOT on a retainer, then you have no clue how the legal world works. whenever you pay a lawyer a fee, it is a legal expense, period.
    1
  35.  @MikeW165  the problem is I do know how the law works. Go ahead. Quote the law that says an NDA is only a legal expense when paid to a lawyer held on a retainer. Then list all the other people who paid a lawyer to arrange an NDA who ended up in court because the lawyer they used wasn't on a retainer. cue crickets.
    1
  36.  @MikeW165  and now the truth. when you pay a lawyer to arrange a Non Disclosure Agreement, that is a legal fee and can, and should, be recorded as a legal fee. But go ahead, quote the law word for word.
    1
  37.  @MikeW165  You are not the brightest, are you. Neither Merchan nor Cannon have to recuse themselves because the law doesn't demand that of them. But both should, so that the appearance of impartiality is maintained. Got it?
    1
  38.  @MikeW165  you just proved your stupidity! Cannon gets to donate without recusal and that is wrong. Merchan gets to donate without recusal and that is wrong. MacAfee gets to donate without recusal and that is wrong. How many more times do I have to spell it out?
    1
  39.  @MikeW165  Totally agree, and in both cases justice is not served. The trial in motion right now is the one in NY, and it is clear the judge is conflicted. IF the FL case comes to trial, and Judge Cannon is in charge, all the Dems will be saying how conflicted and biased she is. And I dare say you will be one of them.
    1
  40.  @MikeW165  agreed, and that is where the law must be changed.
    1
  41.  @mikew764  and given that the Non Disclosure Agreement is handled in its entirety by a lawyer, paying that lawyer for all costs involved is indeed a legal fee. Tell me, when you pay a doctor to treat you, would that be a medical fee?
    1
  42.  @mikew764  the gag order would be on someone else because a witness attacking the defendant is equally offensive as the defendant attacking a witness. to gag only one party when two or more are attacking each other is bias and unconstitutional.
    1
  43.  @mikew764  any payment to your lawyer for arranging a legal contract is a legal expense. but just for fun, let's play your game. if Trump had written "payment of hush money" in his accounts, instead of "legal expense", why would that be a crime? Paying hush money is legal. So, you are saying that paying hush money is legal, and recording it as hush money is absolutely fine, but recording it as a legal expense is a crime and should be liable for jail time. yeah?
    1
  44.  @mikew764  do you think every person that ever paid hush money recorded such a payment as hush money? yes or no?
    1
  45.  @mikew764  the judge is not conflicted because i say he is. the judge is conflicted because he clearly has shown political bias against Trump.
    1
  46.  @mikew764  when a person is being paid to create a legal contract, it is a legal fee. the word "reimbursement" is irrelevant. reimbursement just means that the legal contract was handled by a lawyer who was subsequently paid for doing so. If my wife goes to the pharmacy and buys my medicine, and then I reimburse my wife, that is a medical expense.
    1
  47.  @mikew764  it's not about the hush money at all. if it were about the hush money. Bragg wouldn't insist that the crime was election interference. checkmate. remember, Bragg's argument is that the term "legal expense" is to mask another crime, and he claims that other crime is to interfere in an election! Unlike you, Bragg has no problem with hush money being paid, he knows it happens all the time. it's not about the hush money itself. Take your L and move on!
    1
  48.  @mikew764  there is definitely an ethical reason for Merchan to recuse himself. I would imagine that there is a legal reason too, but I don't know the wording of NY law that covers circumstances for recusal.
    1
  49.  @mikew764  The Constitution does not distinguish between a defendant and a witness when it comes to freedom of speech, and you know it. There is nothing in law that says ONLY a defendant should be gagged when witness and defendant are verbally attacking each other. Common decency would allow the defendant to verbally attack a witness in equal measure as the witness attacks the defendant. The fact that such fairness and common decency has been shoved aside by the judge shows how biased he is. Now, given you are unable to quote NY law that states how the recording of NDAs must be made, I'll assume you have no idea what the law says. checkmate.
    1
  50.  @mikew764  who says the check was written for any hush money? does the check say "for hush money"? surely the check just states an amount to be paid.
    1