Jump to content

A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]


Francisco 2.0

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Orange Jubilee ftw, if you were feelin funky. 

Once upon a time I could buy a six pack of old Milwaukee tall boys for $.88 on sale.  One of my fraternity brothers put  an old Coke machine in the house that sold beer for a quarter. At $.25 a bottle of suds, he made a profit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bullneck said:

 

 

“Dr. Ronny Johnson….”

Trump’s mastery of all things cognitive could’ve gone a little better if he had remembered his name was Ronny Jackson. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Covri said:

It was icehouse when we wanted to get more drunk, keystone light when it was a chill night. Occasionally a mad dog 20/20. We….. we’re young and dumb and had iron stomachs lol.

There was a Keystone Ice age in the early 2000s for us.  I woke up passed out by my buddy’s apartment swimming pool on a Thursday morning. All the neighbors had been stepping over me on the way to classes that day. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Red Five said:

"I don't know why they're not making Biden take cognitive tests like they did with me...."

C'mon Dotard, you're so close to getting it. 

Narrator: He never gets it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was he thinking of Sen. Ron Johnson who was critical in his efforts to illegally overturn Wisconsin's election results?  Or did he mistake Dr. Ronny Jackson for Dr. Ronny Johnson.  

Or was it Rick Johnson's Pizzeria from Colgate University?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

“Dr. Ronny Johnson….”

Trump’s mastery of all things cognitive could’ve gone a little better if he had remembered his name was Ronny Jackson. 

 

Or Ron Jon’s Surf Shop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

Beer snob talk not going away.

 

 

“I took a cognitive test” should be disqualifying words for a presidential candidate, no matter what follows

  • Hook 'Em 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

This is completely understated.  Trump would not be allowed to be a citizen in our country, let alone run for president.   Or his wife for that matter.   

He can’t even travel to Canada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's 8,000 people, Dr. Ben Carson?  Sorry, but there's a Ralph Ellison novel reference or 3/5 compromise reference in here somewhere if Kellyanne has the courage to do what's wrong. 

And no, I don't expect 99% of MAGA nation to get either reference.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m actually convinced that DJT is so surrounded by fraud he has had a complete break from reality and doesn’t realize he’s being tricked and used as a tool. It’s pathetic. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, immamac said:

I’m actually convinced that DJT is so surrounded by fraud he has had a complete break from reality and doesn’t realize he’s being tricked and used as a tool. It’s pathetic. 


100% true 

IMG_0743.jpeg.39d5861fefe81b724ef9f5f4823e739c.jpeg

 

this is all leading to one thing ….

how can Trump lose Michigan and Detroit ?? He had 24000 blacks at his black church event !!!!  File the lawsuits !!!

how can Trump lose New Jersey ?? He had 100,000 at his rally !!! File the lawsuits !!!

…….

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:


100% true 

IMG_0743.jpeg.39d5861fefe81b724ef9f5f4823e739c.jpeg

 

this is all leading to one thing ….

how can Trump lose Michigan and Detroit ?? He had 24000 blacks at his black church event !!!!  File the lawsuits !!!

how can Trump lose New Jersey ?? He had 100,000 at his rally !!! File the lawsuits !!!

…….

The best possible thing that can happen is for Joe Biden to win the 2024 election then to publicly execute trump with his own hands and then immediately pardon himself, followed by his resignation or death by suicide depending on how much you don’t like the guy. 

this would heal America. Lol

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, immamac said:

The best possible thing that can happen is for Joe Biden to win the 2024 election then to publicly execute trump with his own hands and then immediately pardon himself, followed by his resignation or death by suicide depending on how much you don’t like the guy. 

this would heal America. Lol

please leave your erotic fanfic out of this thread.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump is probably thinking he should give a speech the day before the election that if he's elected he'll send anyone who voted for him $1,000.  Which he won't really do.

If he gets elected he's pardoning himself for everything he can.

If he doesn't get elected Jack Smith is frying him anyway.

All upside, no downside.  Did I really type that?

Edited by Bullneck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, immamac said:

I’m actually convinced that DJT is so surrounded by fraud he has had a complete break from reality and doesn’t realize he’s being tricked and used as a tool. It’s pathetic. 

Or he’s a grifter with decades of “fake it till you make it” behind him, culminating in a run as a successful reality tv show star, and he knows his fans will buy anything he says, and that the people who would be bothered by his lies would never have voted for him anyways. It makes perfect sense for him to constantly lie, because telling the truth won’t do him any good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, immamac said:

I don't think people realize how incredibly bad you have to be as president to not get re-elected. 

Really not true. You can be pretty good and not get reelected. The specific pattern is presidents who expend political capital to do things that yield long term benefit at the cost of short term political benefit.

Since the Civil War the only one term presidents who have been bad at the job (i.e, we were worse of because of their presidency) were Hoover and Donald Trump.

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Really not true. You can be pretty good and not get reelected. The specific pattern is presidents who expend political capital to do things that yield long term benefit at the cost of short term political benefit.

Since the Civil War the only one term presidents who have been bad at the job (i.e, we were worse of because of their presidency) were Hoover and Donald Trump.

Gerald Ford, the only president to never be elected. 

Jimmy Carter who is widely regarded as a complete nincompoop and potato, but really nice guy

George HW Bush, do I need to elaborate?

Trump. 

That's it for the alive people voting single term presidents. The fuck kind of shit are you talking? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, immamac said:

Jimmy Carter who is widely regarded as a complete nincompoop and potato, but really nice guy

George HW Bush, do I need to elaborate?

Trump. 

That's it for the alive people voting single term presidents. The fuck kind of shit are you talking? 

Uh, history shit, for starters. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opinion/how-does-trump-stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.htmlBut great illustration of what I’m talking about. 
 

1) Jimmy Carter, who is qualified to run a nuclear power plant and once shut down a reactor core in meltdown was an actually a pretty OK president who did a lot of good and important things:

- Camp David accords, ending the series of wars between Israel and Egypt and effectively closing the question of Israel in the region.

- Pivoted US foreign policy establishment towards stopping the expansion of the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence, laying the ground for collapse, while simultaneously negotiating 

- SALT II

- Established diplomatic relations with China

- Created the departments of Energy and Education 

- Laid the groundwork for lower natural gas prices and lower dependence on fuel imports.

etc

2) Ford- inherited a very tough situation and bad choices on every front, but couple of things:

- got the Helsinki Accords done

- Tax Reduction Act of 74, which probably made inflation worse (as they knew it would), but reversed spiking unemployment after he left office.

3) Bush I is regarded as well above average now and will eventually likely be regarded as one of the best presidents of the 20th century for a variety of reasons, but to my mind  three things stand out:

- masterful handling of the international coalition against Saddam Hussein, concluding with the correct but inconvenient choice not to depose the dictator and leave the regime intact.

- masterful handling of the economy, especially the tax hike to reduce the deficit, which laid the groundwork for our last best chance (destroyed by his son) to control spending on debt maintenance. 
 

- ADA, Clean Air Act amendments and a bunch of other legislation that made tangible improvements to the lives of human beings. 
 

You should a book, QED

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm aware of all these things. I've read a lot of books. You are just wrong and you tried to flex on a pretty innocuous and frankly sane statement to seem like a super smarty-pants. Sorry it didn't work out for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, immamac said:

I'm aware of all these things. I've read a lot of books. You are just wrong and you tried to flex on a pretty innocuous and frankly sane statement to seem like a super smarty-pants. Sorry it didn't work out for you. 

The Rock Reaction GIF by WWE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 


im curious how much he paid for her silence ?

Higher than the Daniels Line, so more than $130,000.  Raping a child has to cost more than silencing a porn star.  i hope, anyway.

But it was probably the death threats that did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

I always thought this case was made up. Was this actually real?

Does this person actually exist?


she worked at mar a lago

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/3/13501364/trump-rape-13-year-old-lawsuit-katie-johnson-allegation
 

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/04/donald-trump-teenage-rape-accusations-lawsuit-dropped
 

go read her testimony 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, immamac said:

I don't think people realize how incredibly bad you had to be as president to not get re-elected. 

fify.  You may not have noticed, but normal left the building a while ago and now everything we know is wrong….or at least suspect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

fify.  You may not have noticed, but normal left the building a while ago and now everything we know is wrong….or at least suspect. 

The word you're looking for is cult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

I always thought this case was made up. Was this actually real?

Does this person actually exist?

Not made up, no.  But, this does illustrate that in a civil suit, you can allege all kinds of wild stuff and it is understood that that is subject to proof and also subject to discovery, where one can attempt to secure evidence/proof of one's wild allegations.

Broadly speaking, when you file the lawsuit, you don't have to have proof of your wild allegations. Depending on the posture of the suit, you may not have to demonstrate the proof of your wild allegations until trial, or a bit before after you have had the opportunity to conduct discovery (summary judgment).  See, e.g. E. Jean Carroll, but see also Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani.

The allegations in a civil lawsuit are not even "testimony."  Presumably, they are what the plaintiff would testify to under oath in a deposition and at trial, but that is part of the discovery process.

We really have no idea whether Jane Doe's allegations are truthful or can be proven.  The suit was dismissed voluntarily before the veracity of the allegations could be tested.

On the other hand, the wild allegations in Powell's and Giuliani's suits were tested early because they sought immediate relief and tossed for lack of evidence.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, immamac said:

I'm aware of all these things. I've read a lot of books. You are just wrong and you tried to flex on a pretty innocuous and frankly sane statement to seem like a super smarty-pants. Sorry it didn't work out for you. 

What Bozo posted is factually accurate, and I think he's correct that history will judge Carter and GHWB, especially the latter, much more kindly than the uninformed popular opinion.

But, this America, man.  The uninformed popular opinion is what gets people elected, or unelected as the case may be.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Not made up, no.  But, this does illustrate that in a civil suit, you can allege all kinds of wild stuff and it is understood that that is subject to proof and also subject to discovery, where one can attempt to secure evidence/proof of one's wild allegations.

Broadly speaking, when you file the lawsuit, you don't have to have proof of your wild allegations. Depending on the posture of the suit, you may not have to demonstrate the proof of your wild allegations until trial, or a bit before after you have had the opportunity to conduct discovery (summary judgment).  See, e.g. E. Jean Carroll, but see also Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani.

The allegations in a civil lawsuit are not even "testimony."  Presumably, they are what the plaintiff would testify to under oath in a deposition and at trial, but that is part of the discovery process.

We really have no idea whether Jane Doe's allegations are truthful or can be proven.  The suit was dismissed voluntarily before the veracity of the allegations could be tested.

On the other hand, the wild allegations in Powell's and Giuliani's suits were tested early because they sought immediate relief and tossed for lack of evidence.

The person is real and the civil lawsuit was filed. That’s all that can be said as fact. Right?

I am surprised no one has tried to expose this story further. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

The person is real and the civil lawsuit was filed. That’s all that can be said as fact. Right?

I am surprised no one has tried to expose this story further. 

Pretty much, yeah.  One of Jane Doe's attorneys was Lisa Bloom, Gloria Allred's daughter.  As far as I know, Ms. Bloom is "for real" and seemingly would not be involved in a lawsuit that couldn't be proven, even if it was a long shot.  She is, however, a pretty big attention horse, so you kind of never know.  And, there's quite a few reasons a lawsuit is voluntarily dismissed, but one of them is that the allegations are false or highly unlikely to be proven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...