Comments by "DS_SD" (@simondahl5437) on "LegalEagle" channel.

  1. You know the funny thing is… some of us actually have the spine to retain an opinion even when changing it would be convenient in the moment.
    13
  2. I love how you have no evidence of that.
    11
  3.  @JuanRojelio-b6e  Yes. He won. Not disputing that. But some people evidently think that all democrats who have opposed the electoral college before, when say trump didn’t win the popular vote in 2016, will change their mind now just because trump did win the popular vote.
    8
  4. I believe he was found guilty of SA.
    7
  5. Nobody can drink a 180 degree liquid.
    7
  6. Any source for that predecessor has done the same thing?
    6
  7. And I suppose you have some sort of evidence for this?
    5
  8. You know the funny thing is… some of us actually have the spine to retain an opinion even when changing it would be convenient in the moment.
    4
  9. How is this video woke? You barely know what woke means.
    4
  10. Except you have no basis for that claim.
    4
  11. Did you watch the video? She wanted the insurance company to pay, and for that she had to sue. Why would she ask her own brother/sister for compensation?
    4
  12.  @zambi5796  No. I’ve pointed that out numerous times. During trump, during Biden, and now during trump again.
    3
  13. Except he hasn’t proved that at all.
    2
  14. He has nerver said he was unbiased. Nor does he need to.
    2
  15. No matter his motives, he isn’t wrong. It is in the public interest to know.
    2
  16. Defamation is a crime, which he as a lawyer knows, and is trained for. He doesnt speculate. He takes up news, and gives a legal perspective. No speculation, just educated guesses.
    2
  17. The investigators were there earlier, in June.
    1
  18. Probably more of an educated estimation based on the circumstances and surrounding evidence.
    1
  19. What makes it seem that way? You do realize that besides the target this is all very normal?
    1
  20. And you think that somehow means that you shouldn’t make sure they didn’t find something?
    1
  21. Plant evidence? I’m sorry, how do you suggest law enforcement conducts raids then?
    1
  22. Why not check?
    1
  23. Funny how you have no basis for that claim. And you do realize the federal agency, was the FBI. The same FBI who’s leader is a Trump appointee.
    1
  24. The investigation wasn’t getting shut down before that… Use your brain.
    1
  25. Wasn’t the FBI, it’s was the DOJ, NSD. And secondly it’s very possible they weren’t allowed to review the document and therefore didn’t have cause to seize them. Third, someone not objecting is not approval.
    1
  26.  @raygunn654 . Funny how you say “Wrong”, yet don’t have any argument to counter. Usually means someone’s either stupid or wrong themselves. Pick one.
    1
  27. Not much of a joke.
    1
  28.  @johneden2033 . Start to appear? Yet this video was produced before Trump won. So you believing this will appear between now and 2028 is you believing that democrats do have the spine to stick with their opinion.
    1
  29. Ex presidents are fully allowed to have classified documents as long as they are properly secured, and the documents are copies since the originals should have been sent to the national archives.
    1
  30. The irony. It’s usually the republicans who talk without any basis for their claims.
    1