Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "MattMorseTV" channel.

@SuperSikntired Being aware is a lot different than being obsessed. I may take note of how a person's eyes reacts while speaking but the colour and shape are irrelevant. I might notice how a person may sweating profusely, due to the moisture on their skin, which might indicate nervousness but, once again, the colour of the skin tells me nothing about that person. I don't draw conclusions based on the colour of their skin. There's no point in even listening to that person if the natural colour of their skin is my primary assessment tool. It would be illogical to do that.
5
@norbdavis2290 What was he found guilty of in those 34 convicted felon cases? I've asked and no one can tell me. Adultery, while unethical, isn't against the law. Neither is asking for a non-disclosure agreement UNLESS you're using it to cover a crime. Since adultery is a NOT a crime, what crime did he commit? No one seems to know. He's never been convicted of sexual misconduct. Civil trials don't hold to the same high standards of a criminal court. In other words, guilt is adjudicated by standards of evidence that are flimsy, at best. I never heard her defend that alleged crime or the adjudicated sexual conviction. She defended policies. A person can be wrong on one issue and correct on another. I didn't get 0 (zero), on school exams, because I got one question wrong. Government policies are the same. Being wrong on one issue doesn't mean that ALL policies are wrong.
3
@norbdavis2290 Covered up the payments? What do you think a non-disclosure agreement is for? it's payment to NOT disclose an event or events....to cover things up. That's not illegal. What he did was claim that it was a legal expense on tax papers. The DA claims that it should have been campaign expense. An accounting error. He didn't even cover up that he paid that disclosure agreement. I've done that on my tax return and it was corrected with no fine or legal action. "among other things that were fraudulent'. Another way of saying that you have no idea. Just like I predicted.
2
@norbdavis2290 It's NOT against the law to have a disclosure agreement and saying that it was legal fees isn't a felony. Then you use the word "if". "if it was on the up and up". "If" implies that you don't know IF it was on the up and up. It's the question I asked. What is that "if"? You've NOT answered it, yet. Show me the underlying crime. CRIME!!!! Don't give me an "if". You don't say to a murder suspect since we don't know IF you're guilty, we're going to convict you of murder and off to jail you go. Now, tell me the crime.
2
@ Calling her a liar means nothing. You have to show the lie and prove why it is a lie. If you don't do that, you might as well have said nothing because you're statement means nothing. Name calling is the last resort of those who have no argument to stand on.
1
@BHadassah I have no problem with the binder. It's evidence to back up my claims. It also ensures complete accuracy when giving quotes. Like a lot of people, I don't have perfect recall and I want to be accurate. Why not use all the tools available? I know that I'm not infallible and I'm not afraid to admit it. One word can change the meaning of a quote and those who want to tear you down are always vigilant in order to pick up the slightest error. Having the evidence at your fingertips is a good way to stop your detractors in their tracks.
1
I don't believe that it is 47%. Why is there no undecided classification? I'm sure that there are at least 10% who aren't sure of whether they approve or not. I'll estimate that it's 53% Trump approval, a little under 40% disapproval and the rest uncertain. This is CBS and they've been reporting on everything in ways to make the Democrats look good. If it is 10% uncertain, like I'm guessing, they'd never let Trump have any part of that 10% so I'm thinking that they assigned it all to the Trump disapproval column.
1