USA news & politics

[Seeker]

Trump threatens federal control of D.C. following attack on administration staffer known as 'Big Balls'

Edward Coristine, the Trump administration employee nicknamed "Big Balls," was the victim of a carjacking and assault in Washington over the weekend, police said.

www.yahoo.com

 

[AlRums]

Literally nothing you wrote there is from the video. Again, do you live in an alternative reality?
1) Nobody attacked Habba for being a woman
2) She didn't defend a woman from harassment, she sabotaged a woman's legal defence to assist Trump (you know, the sort of thing that can get you disbarred)
3) She was reprimanded by judges multiple times for her actions defending Trump.
4) You aren't thinking critically at all.

For once, stop being a contrarian ****. As usual you simply switch off rather than address any of the content (and what content you think you are addressing you have literally made up, it's nowhere in the video).

Former Trump golf club worker was sexually harassed by supervisor, then conned into signing illegal NDA, lawsuit says

Trump attorney Alina Habba duped Alice Bianco into signing the non-disclosure agreement in 2021, according to a suit filed this week in New Jersey.

www.nbcnews.com

Somehow you think the above is Habba defending a woman from harassment!? You're ******* insane.

Alina Habba settles with ex-Trump golf club waitress who accused her of betrayal

Lawyer reportedly settled with a former Trump golf club employee in August

www.independent.co.uk

If Habba was defending her, why did she have to settle? Why was the victim tricked into signing an NDA when it's illegal to do so in the state?

DH doesn't understand anything he reads or watches, he always comes away with the opposite.

I found the video a good watch and very informative.

 

[Ddanno]

How Habba ever achieved a legal qualification will forever be a mystery. Why trump continues to employ her, not so much.

 

[AlRums]

How Habba ever achieved a legal qualification will forever be a mystery. Why trump continues to employ her, not so much.

I think she lost every strumpet case she defended.

 

[dirty harry]

Literally nothing you wrote there is from the video. Again, do you live in an alternative reality?
1) Nobody attacked Habba for being a woman
2) She didn't defend a woman from harassment, she sabotaged a woman's legal defence to assist Trump (you know, the sort of thing that can get you disbarred)
3) She was reprimanded by judges multiple times for her actions defending Trump.
4) You aren't thinking critically at all.

For once, stop being a contrarian ****. As usual you simply switch off rather than address any of the content (and what content you think you are addressing you have literally made up, it's nowhere in the video).

Former Trump golf club worker was sexually harassed by supervisor, then conned into signing illegal NDA, lawsuit says

Trump attorney Alina Habba duped Alice Bianco into signing the non-disclosure agreement in 2021, according to a suit filed this week in New Jersey.

www.nbcnews.com

Somehow you think the above is Habba defending a woman from harassment!? You're ******* insane.

Alina Habba settles with ex-Trump golf club waitress who accused her of betrayal

Lawyer reportedly settled with a former Trump golf club employee in August

www.independent.co.uk

If Habba was defending her, why did she have to settle? Why was the victim tricked into signing an NDA when it's illegal to do so in the state?

Wait, he literally said she only had a job through her husband, honoured a parking garage lol that suggests she didnt deserve her position because shes just a woman who married In.

He also said she shoe horned her way into to Bioncos case, and had her sign and NDA for a pay off, which Bianco absolutely agreed to so must have been satisfied with the outcome.

And thats where the video lost me, this guy absolutely detests Trump, doesnt try to hide it, and therefore his opinion on anything Trump related is biased, and his videos are absolutely pandering to an anti Trump crowd. He prioritises views and revenue over truth IMO

 

[dirty harry]

DH doesn't understand anything he reads or watches, he always comes away with the opposite.

I found the video a good watch and very informative.

Of course you did, it confirms every thing you want to be true.

Do me a favour, and post a link of the last videos you enjoyed, that you disagreed with...

I'll wait.

 

[dirty harry]

How Habba ever achieved a legal qualification will forever be a mystery. Why trump continues to employ her, not so much.

Maybe her qualifying through law school?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Wait, he literally said she only had a job through her husband, honoured a parking garage lol that suggests she didnt deserve her position because shes just a woman who married In.

He also said she shoe horned her way into to Bioncos case, and had her sign and NDA for a pay off, which Bianco absolutely agreed to so must have been satisfied with the outcome.

And thats where the video lost me, this guy absolutely detests Trump, doesnt try to hide it, and therefore his opinion on anything Trump related is biased, and his videos are absolutely pandering to an anti Trump crowd. He prioritises views and revenue over truth IMO

A vast assumption you make there

No, that is again such a bullshit take. When someone takes on legal counsel, they trust the advice they are being given. The fact Habba had to settle with Bianco for what she did would say she clearly was not satisfied with the outcome. Also targeting someone who already has legal counsel, lying constantly about their counsel as a means to make the remove them and put yourself as their counsel when you already have a vested interest in the other side getting a better deal is serious legal malpractice.

Yes he detests Trump and doesn't try to hide it, that doesn't make what is being said untrue. You seem incapable of recognising that someone can be emotionally invested in a position AND still tell the truth. I notice you claim he didn't tell the truth yet you can't point out any lies, just your own interpretation of things. You think he's biased about Trump? Ok genius, if you think Trump had a rational explanation for using Habba, by all means offer it. Let's list a few facts (not opinions, FACTS)

- Habba NEVER served in any capacity as a prosecutor prior to being appointed to attorney.
- Habbas legal expertise prior to getting involved with Trump was for a small parking lot business
- Habba lost nearly every case she represented Trump in, costing him millions
- Habba was reprimanded multiple times in courtroom for her actions.
- Habba is current under an ethics investigation for her actions.

So if the guy is oh so biased, why don't you offer up a rational reason for Trump selecting Habba both to represent him privately and then as a state attorney. Go on. Better yet, why not point to things in the video that are straight up lies rather than your own twisted interpretation of them? You can't. You literally thought the Republicans best performance in a century was signs of a dying party so let's say your ability to fact check is pretty **** poor.

 

[AlRums]

Of course you did, it confirms every thing you want to be true.

Do me a favour, and post a link of the last videos you enjoyed, that you disagreed with...

I'll wait.

At least I post informative links

From you, nothing

 

[AlRums]

Wait, he literally said she only had a job through her husband, honoured a parking garage lol that suggests she didnt deserve her position because shes just a woman who married In.

He also said she shoe horned her way into to Bioncos case, and had her sign and NDA for a pay off, which Bianco absolutely agreed to so must have been satisfied with the outcome.

And thats where the video lost me, this guy absolutely detests Trump, doesnt try to hide it, and therefore his opinion on anything Trump related is biased, and his videos are absolutely pandering to an anti Trump crowd. He prioritises views and revenue over truth IMO

Yep, Bionco was so satisfied that she sued Habba for committing her to an illegal NDA and forced Habba to settle.

You really don't read anything do you?

 

[AlRums]

A vast assumption you make there

No, that is again such a bullshit take. When someone takes on legal counsel, they trust the advice they are being given. The fact Habba had to settle with Bianco for what she did would say she clearly was not satisfied with the outcome. Also targeting someone who already has legal counsel, lying constantly about their counsel as a means to make the remove them and put yourself as their counsel when you already have a vested interest in the other side getting a better deal is serious legal malpractice.

Yes he detests Trump and doesn't try to hide it, that doesn't make what is being said untrue. You seem incapable of recognising that someone can be emotionally invested in a position AND still tell the truth. I notice you claim he didn't tell the truth yet you can't point out any lies, just your own interpretation of things. You think he's biased about Trump? Ok genius, if you think Trump had a rational explanation for using Habba, by all means offer it. Let's list a few facts (not opinions, FACTS)

- Habba NEVER served in any capacity as a prosecutor prior to being appointed to attorney.
- Habbas legal expertise prior to getting involved with Trump was for a small parking lot business
- Habba lost nearly every case she represented Trump in, costing him millions
- Habba was reprimanded multiple times in courtroom for her actions.
- Habba is current under an ethics investigation for her actions.

So if the guy is oh so biased, why don't you offer up a rational reason for Trump selecting Habba both to represent him privately and then as a state attorney. Go on. Better yet, why not point to things in the video that are straight up lies rather than your own twisted interpretation of them? You can't. You literally thought the Republicans best performance in a century was signs of a dying party so let's say your ability to fact check is pretty **** poor.

She may have other talents that at least Bill Clinton might be an expert on.

 

[dirty harry]

A vast assumption you make there

No, that is again such a bullshit take. When someone takes on legal counsel, they trust the advice they are being given. The fact Habba had to settle with Bianco for what she did would say she clearly was not satisfied with the outcome. Also targeting someone who already has legal counsel, lying constantly about their counsel as a means to make the remove them and put yourself as their counsel when you already have a vested interest in the other side getting a better deal is serious legal malpractice.

Yes he detests Trump and doesn't try to hide it, that doesn't make what is being said untrue. You seem incapable of recognising that someone can be emotionally invested in a position AND still tell the truth. I notice you claim he didn't tell the truth yet you can't point out any lies, just your own interpretation of things. You think he's biased about Trump? Ok genius, if you think Trump had a rational explanation for using Habba, by all means offer it. Let's list a few facts (not opinions, FACTS)

- Habba NEVER served in any capacity as a prosecutor prior to being appointed to attorney.
- Habbas legal expertise prior to getting involved with Trump was for a small parking lot business
- Habba lost nearly every case she represented Trump in, costing him millions
- Habba was reprimanded multiple times in courtroom for her actions.
- Habba is current under an ethics investigation for her actions.

So if the guy is oh so biased, why don't you offer up a rational reason for Trump selecting Habba both to represent him privately and then as a state attorney. Go on. Better yet, why not point to things in the video that are straight up lies rather than your own twisted interpretation of them? You can't.

Mate your jumping the gun, because hes emotionally invested in the downfall of Trump, is exactly why I cant trust his opinions of Trump. He's already corrupt.

You wouldnt trust my opinions on Tom Curry's selection on the lions tour if I was Jac Morgans dad would you? Because id be biased.

Thats why i couldn't get past 2 mins of the video, when he stated Trump.lives unethical practice. From that point I know this guy will frame everything Trump wide as negative.

But hey, I'll give you a chance to prove me wrong, send me a link to a legal eagle video where he gives Trump credit, agrees with Trumps legal victory, or let me make it easier, name me a timeline of say a week where he hasn't utilised a n anti Trump headline for views...

I'll wait.

 

[dirty harry]

At least I post informative links

From you, nothing

Im still waiting...

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Mate your jumping the gun, because hes emotionally invested in the downfall of Trump, is exactly why I cant trust his opinions of Trump. He's already corrupt.

You wouldnt trust my opinions on Tom Curry's selection on the lions tour if I was Jac Morgans dad would you? Because id be biased.

Thats why i couldn't get past 2 mins of the video, when he stated Trump.lives unethical practice. From that point I know this guy will frame everything Trump wide as negative.

But hey, I'll give you a chance to prove me wrong, send me a link to a legal eagle video where he gives Trump credit, agrees with Trumps legal victory, or let me make it easier, name me a timeline of say a week where he hasn't utilised a n anti Trump headline for views...

I'll wait.

You're biased against the channel so everything you say about them is a lie. Fun game isn't it? Again, emotional investment in seeing Trump fall DOESN'T prove he's lying. So I'll ask again, state anything that he said that is a lie.

Jac Morgans dad can still use facts to support their claim. Bias doesn't mean everything you say on a topic is false. This is very very basic level logical reasoning. In fact dismissing an entire argument because of an accusation of bias is little more than an ad hominem fallacy, you are attacking the person, not the argument.

Wait, you want to claim Trump doesn't support unethical practices...? Really? The guy has literally been found guilty of fraud and defamation, has fired numerous watchdogs and made a habit out of refusing to pay small businesses and suing everything that moved.

Why don't you prove me wrong and, just for once, point out an actual factually incorrect statement in their videos. You've made the accusation of lying yet, once again, you are failing to deliver. I've asked you multiple times, show how their content is not telling the truth.

 

[AlRums]

Im still waiting...

You'd be better off in qanon, they'd worship your crap there

 

[AlRums]

You're biased against the channel so everything you say about them is a lie. Fun game isn't it? Again, emotional investment in seeing Trump fall DOESN'T prove he's lying. So I'll ask again, state anything that he said that is a lie.

Jac Morgans dad can still use facts to support their claim. Bias doesn't mean everything you say on a topic is false. This is very very basic level logical reasoning. In fact dismissing an entire argument because of an accusation of bias is little more than an ad hominem fallacy, you are attacking the person, not the argument.

Wait, you want to claim Trump doesn't support unethical practices...? Really? The guy has literally been found guilty of fraud and defamation, has fired numerous watchdogs and made a habit out of refusing to pay small businesses and suing everything that moved.

Why don't you prove me wrong and, just for once, point out an actual factually incorrect statement in their videos. You've made the accusation of lying yet, once again, you are failing to deliver. I've asked you multiple times, show how their content is not telling the truth.

He can't, as he just admitted, he doesn't watch the videos

"i couldn't get past 2 mins of the video"

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

He can't, as he just admitted, he doesn't watch the videos

"i couldn't get past 2 mins of the video"

For someone who was making accusations about pearl clutching the other day, it only took the comment that Trump was happy with unethical acts for Harry to clutch his pearls ever so tightly and cry about bias.

 

[dirty harry]

You're biased against the channel so everything you say about them is a lie. Fun game isn't it? Again, emotional investment in seeing Trump fall DOESN'T prove he's lying. So I'll ask again, state anything that he said that is a lie.

Jac Morgans dad can still use facts to support their claim. Bias doesn't mean everything you say on a topic is false. This is very very basic level logical reasoning. In fact dismissing an entire argument because of an accusation of bias is little more than an ad hominem fallacy, you are attacking the person, not the argument.

Wait, you want to claim Trump doesn't support unethical practices...? Really? The guy has literally been found guilty of fraud and defamation, has fired numerous watchdogs and made a habit out of refusing to pay small businesses and suing everything that moved.

Why don't you prove me wrong and, just for once, point out an actual factually incorrect statement in their videos. You've made the accusation of lying yet, once again, you are failing to deliver. I've asked you multiple times, show how their content is not telling the truth.

Its not adhominem though is it...

A youtuber has a goal, that goal is views and revenue. A youtuber who wants views and revenue posts anti Trump content because its popular, they exploit that popularity by solely posting anti Trump content, 3 times a week, so in every Trump instance the youtuber, who has built an audience of Anti Trumpers, has a financial incentive to only post anti Trump content.

To post a pro Trump video, let's say his strategy for winning the presidency for a 2nd term, would be financially devastating to this chanell.

When someone's entire business model is based on anti Trump sentiment, it is absolutely a solid idea that their view is biased in favour of their livelihood.

When Kamala and Trump were running against each other did you consider Trumps views of Kamala valid?

 

[dirty harry]

You'd be better off in qanon, they'd worship your crap there

Still waiting bud. I get it, you dont want to address the question, because you cant, but you can just say it, I won't judge.

If you never watch any content that you disagree with, how can you trust your own opinion?!

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Its not adhominem though is it...

A youtuber has a goal, that goal is views and revenue. A youtuber who wants views and revenue posts anti Trump content because its popular, they exploit that popularity by solely posting anti Trump content, 3 times a week, so in every Trump instance the youtuber, who has built an audience of Anti Trumpers, has a financial incentive to only post anti Trump content.

To post a pro Trump video, let's say his strategy for winning the presidency for a 2nd term, would be financially devastating to this chanell.

When someone's entire business model is based on anti Trump sentiment, it is absolutely a solid idea that their view is biased in favour of their livelihood.

When Kamala and Trump were running against each other did you consider Trumps views of Kamala valid?

It is an ad hominem, you say an argument is false because of who is making it, that's an ad hominem. Everything you say about the channel is false because you have a bias against them, simple as that. You are asserting they are lying without actually showing any lies, merely by asserting ulterior motives. I'll say it again, bias is NOT evidence of lies. In court both sides are biased in their favour. By your logic, neither side can therefore tell the truth. Going to continue down this line or accept it's bullshit?

You still haven't posted a factually incorrect statement from the channel, despite accusing them of lying. Try again.