Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "Trump Could Owe More Than $400 Million After Court Rulings —Here’s What To Know About His Finances" video.

 @PeachysMom Bootstrapping fallacies born of nothing more than fallacious social theories.
3
@MrDuane-lr8dm It's called preponderance of evidence. They're supposed to weigh the complainant/petitioner's theory against the respondent's on equal terms. Do you see anything missing from "the norms" or not?
3
@millroyboy07 Which "it" did "he" admit to?
3
@joyceannford Criminal actions. LOL. You know nothing of US law or history.
1
@robertpendergrass7996 Hindi Marxism, eh? Pretty funny indeed.
1
@Dragonflylane77 These people are usually very well versed on Legal Realism when it comes to their agitprop. But, Capitalism is the Greatest Injustice of all. So, yeah. Deep Pocket Theory and Marxism prevailed. New York State is lost. Just as the entire West Coast of the USA is lost.
1
@MrDuane-lr8dm "...the exact same laws he has relied on to sue other people..." What do you mean by "exact same laws"? Nobody said that the law needed to be suspended for Trump. Quite the opposite. Tort law is extremely old. It predates the colonies, in case you didn't know. The Constitution is supposed to protect and perfect equal application of the law. It's not supposed to be a tool of Marxist Equity. OK? Critical Theory in law is newer than the colonies and newer than the written Constitution. So it was NOT the same legal doctrines that were employed by Trump and then used against him. Facts are supposed to matter. Deciding what is admissible in court is NOT supposed to be based on Identity Politics and Property is Theft. This isn't Jacobin France. Or it wasn't until you gullible people came along.
1
@MrDuane-lr8dm No sheet, Sherlock. Way to say a lot without adding anything to the conversation. The "norms" are not what is controversial here. It's the total lack of knowledge about how each case is supposed to be handled and governed by the judge from start to finish. OK, confused dude? You have no idea what is controversial about this case. Agreed or not?
1
@Silver-jv1us This complainant already has a huge hill to climb if she wants to meet that standard in any case. IOW, she wants to have a judge help her attorney with jury selection and instructions just on the hope that her testimony is actionable in any way. She's a laughingstock and useful only to criminal-minded Marxists.
1