Jump to content

Strike

Members
  • Content Count

    35,220
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    41

Strike last won the day on March 12

Strike had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,885 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

30,757 profile views
  1. Strike

    Who wants NCAA hats 2024?

    GO DUKE!!!!
  2. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    Well if they were the banks would be all over it. For some reason the banks have no problem with all these investors "breaking the law." If the victim doesn't care why should the DA? And where are all these other prosecutions? If they're all breaking the law there should be a lot more prosecutions. Instead, we have ONE prosecution using a law that has NEVER been used in this way in 70+ years, by a person who ran for office on getting Trump. Yeah, this is legit.
  3. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    No, it's not. From your article: Trump is accused of overvaluing his assets. He is not accused of hiding his criminal past, using a false SSN, or any of the other things this guy is accused of. If this guy had been honest he would not have gotten a loan. At worst, and I don't believe this is true, the allegations against Trump say he would have paid a higher interest rate. There is absolutely NOTHING similar between these cases.
  4. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    Trump did not break any laws. A bunch of real estate investors have come out publicly on his side saying that what he did is what every developer/investor does. Some have stopped doing business in NY. I haven't seen one that has said he did anything wrong. The banks he supposedly victimized testified in the trial, on his side, and have said they have no issues doing business with him in the future. There was nothing out of the ordinary here. Just a DA who ran on getting Trump and following through with that promise despite not having a case.
  5. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    So you're complaining that RLLD is using examples that aren't similar to what Trump did by posting an example that is nothing like what Trump did?
  6. Strike

    Timmy’s thread for serious discussion and debate

    It is factually incorrect to post someone's original allegation but not also include that they withdrew said allegation. That's called a smear campaign. Again, this type of posting pattern may have a lot to do with why you were relegated to your own thread, and that thread is a ghost town. You might ponder that instead of LOL'ing at it.
  7. Strike

    Timmy’s thread for serious discussion and debate

    Tim, I think you raped me when I was 12 years old. Oh, I guess we get to call you a rapist pedo forever now even if I later realize I "made a mistake", as the accuser in this case did. It's funny how you mention her original accusation but conveniently forget to mention how she not only dropped her lawsuit, but acknowledges as did her attorney that she may have been mistaken. It's like how newspapers report when someone is arrested on the front page but bury it, if posting it at all, when they are exonerated. No wonder you love the MSM so much.
  8. Strike

    Timmy’s thread for serious discussion and debate

    This is factually incorrect. As I've told you over and over, I have no problem debating you on our differences in opinion. But it's amazing how frequently you have the actual facts wrong. Maybe that's why this thread is a ghost town.
  9. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    If what she said were true there wouldn't be a Trump case. Therefore, we know she's lying.
  10. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    I don't know if this is the same document I posted for Tim or not. That was several weeks ago IIRC. However, the reason I had you post it was so that we'd be talking about the same document. I don't want to ASSUME what document you're talking about when you make some vague reference to a 92 page document. I could be thinking of some totally different document. This gives us a common understanding. Now, to the document you just posted. It's about the damages portion of the trial. The document I posted was about the summary judgment motions which decided the guilty/not guilty part of the trial. Totally separate so not sure why you'd expect the same arguments and/or valuations to be included in both. They're completely separate portions of the case. It's not like the two documents overlap in any significant manner other than being related to the same case.
  11. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    ROFLMAO. Would be nice if you responded to what was posted and not what you wanted it to say.
  12. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    The discussion is public. You can go back and read it if you'd like. Whether you'd be able to comprehend what you read is debatable.
  13. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    Well that's a relief, especially since the discussion I was having had NOTHING to do with the damages amount Boyo
  14. Strike

    Trump INDICTED

    Come on man. @TimHauck and @Mike Honcho are centrists!!!!!
×