Comments by "ricardo kowalski" (@ricardokowalski1579) on "LegalEagle" channel.

  1. It is like the huge "no smoking" sign painted on the superstructure of every oil tanker/ LNG ship. If you are in need of this remainder, you should not be on board this ship. The lawyers put the sign up, the dead paid for the sign.
    8
  2. and you are paying for the racket!😁
    6
  3. 18:38 The trustee has no mandate to make a " more equitable" distribution of the proceeds The only mandate is maximum value. Highest bidder. Mr Murray's job is to maximize value. The " for all creditors" is NOT part of the mandate, the ratio of distribution of the money is outside the purview of the liquidator. This comment is not to be understood as support/approval for the previous owner. I am only talking about the liquidation process.
    3
  4. Either sue Elon for the specific records being made public, or shut up about "allegedly" stealing data. Stopping illegal payments DOES NOT violate the constitution.
    2
  5. If Trump engaged in "insurrection", why is he not imprisioned?
    2
  6. 1:45 "...ruled twice that government actors like police and social workers actually have no duty to protect anyone " FINE Ok... G R E A T. So why did the protect the shooter from the angry parents outside? Why did they handcuff and taser parents willing to harm the shooter? Why are they claiming that they were " protecting " the children from crossfire? On what grounds did the prevent and threaten parents willing to die themselves? Government's can't have it BOTH ways. If they have no duty to protect anyone ...they also have NO DUTY to stop mobs from lynching killers. Why are the cops protecting killers ? If the government will not take the duty of protection, then government can not have the monopoly of violence 8:10 "a duty to the public" is the socialization of safety. The individual is no longer paramount and tyranny is law.
    1
  7. Noteworthy: terrorism is the use of violence to obtain a political goal. By accusing the shooter of terrorism, they admit that healthcare insurance devisions are no longer a private business between willing parties... but a political matter. From there it follows that the private health insurers decisions and actions must be voted by congress.
    1
  8. total red herring we don't need to change HOW the federal government is elected we need to REDUCE the federal government That way you can "popular vote" your OWN governor to your heart content, without affecting others (externalities) Don't fall for this distraction.
    1
  9. "separation of power" was always a fraud. Power is either absolute or not power at all The legislative subordinated to the executive long ago. But the judicial now reigns above the executive
    1
  10. Here is a thought. If Hollywood wants to "take a stand" on guns, why don't they ban westerns, police dramas and war movies? Just say they will not be nominated for the Oscars. Problem solved! If the academy can make rules about ethnicity... how hard is to say "zero firearms"?
    1
  11.  @haxie4516  so if he is charged but has not been convicted, it takes just hearsay to kick someone out of the ballot?
    1
  12.  @haxie4516  so "charging" somebody is enough proof that it happened?
    1
  13.  @haxie4516  how does a "legal fact" get established without a trial?
    1
  14.  @haxie4516  court judgement without a trial? Like the red queen?
    1
  15.  @haxie4516  how can a court say someone is an "insurrectionist" if there is no accusation, trial and conviction of the crime?
    1
  16.  @haxie4516  is having 35 years of age the same as commiting a crime? I believe "insurrection" is a crime. What does age have to do with the subject? Stop making analogies.
    1
  17.  @haxie4516  how can someone be a part of an insurrection, but not been acussed of it? Again, is it not a crime?
    1
  18.  @haxie4516  ok... So insurrection is not a crime. 🙄
    1
  19.  @haxie4516  funny you keep saying that. 18 USC 2383: Rebellion or insurrection Text contains those laws in effect on January 23, 2000 From Title 18-CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I-CRIMES CHAPTER 115-TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES §2383. Rebellion or insurrection Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. So it is a crime only when you say it is? And you can be an "insurrectionist" without being a criminal for it. Great fun!
    1
  20.  @haxie4516  what happened? Are you still correct?
    1
  21.  @haxie4516  you insist that it is NOT a crime? Despite what I quoted you?
    1
  22.  @haxie4516  18 USC 2383: Rebellion or insurrection Text contains those laws in effect on January 23, 2000 From Title 18-CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I-CRIMES CHAPTER 115-TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES §2383. Rebellion or insurrection Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
    1
  23.  @haxie4516  still blind, are we?
    1
  24.  @haxie4516  One more time. 18 USC2383 18 USC 2383: Rebellion or insurrection Text contains those laws in effect on January 23, 2000 From Title 18-CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I-CRIMES CHAPTER 115-TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES §2383. Rebellion or insurrection Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. Still can't see it?
    1
  25.  @haxie4516  still can see it?
    1
  26.  @haxie4516  QUOTE "18 USC 2383: Rebellion or insurrection From Title 18-CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I-CRIMES CHAPTER 115-TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES §2383. Rebellion or insurrection Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. Still can't see it? THAT'S "wierd"
    1
  27. Still can't see it? 👁️
    1
  28.  @haxie4516  you stated that insurrection was NOT a crime I am showing you it IS. And it has to be proven in court. At a trial. You said you were "correct", and I was not. The only obsession here is your insistance on making false claims
    1
  29. 17:57 if they claimed to meet DNV the lawsuit is a go mind you, the object of the lawsuit is not to bankrupt or punish oceangate what they want to get is the life insurance companies to pay
    1