Danderman123

If Biden can't keep it together, he will replaced by the Democratic convention. Biden faces a lot of opportunities to demonstrate he is still capable between now and the convention. If Trump declines further, he still will get the nomination.

All it will take is the Trump billionaire tax cuts to expire next year. I doubt any Congress will extend them.

Perhaps the seemingly growing number of gay people is a factor.

The Trump fans can't sense how this year is going to proceed. One hit after another on Trump's chances, as the Dems coalesce around Joe Biden. If Biden wins, everyone knows he will depart after his 2nd term ends. If Trump wins, he's going to try to be president for life. Everyone understands that, which is one of the reasons that Trump will lose.

In the last 24 hours, I have read some pretty crazy posts from Trump fans: "Trump was charged with possession of classified documents, but that shouldn't be a crime". I am sure Reality Winner would agree. "Biden and Trump both had classified documents. It doesn't matter that Biden gave them back as soon as they were discovered, and Trump hid his documents and wouldn't give them back". These are not great criminal defenses. Nor are these useful for winning independent voters.

No, I flew out of LAX. No outgoing passport controls. But zero passport controls walking across the border - outbound

You are referring to illegal-on-illegal crime? You are probably correct that illegals who are crime victims probably don't report the crime in most cases.

You could be right, but let's see a link.

When I left the USA, I didn't fill out a census form, and so, I wasn't counted.

It's such a crisis at the border that the Republicans are delaying action until 2025.

The conversation is about the potential appeal of the gigantic punitive award in the second defamation case. It's hypothetical.

This is the post that you responded to: "I expect such a review will consider the defamation that Trump continued to heap on Carroll, even while in in court and in earshot of the jury. It’s not a punitive damage award for a first offense against Carroll, it’s an award for continuing defamation after having first been found liable by the court for defamation. The punitive damages were stepped up as a direct result of Trump’s continuing defamation." Your allusion to the 14th Amendment case makes me think you've lost the plot. We're talking about the Defamation case.

So when Somchai leaves Thailand to pick berries in Finland, how is he counted?

crime rate for illegals in the USA is less than the general population crime rate.

No worries, some of Trump's billionaire tax cuts will expire next year.

Read what? I just gave my opinion on some easy steps to reduce income disparity in the US.

The post you responded to contained facts that are not in dispute.

I normally would agree with you that large punitive damage awards are normally chewed up by appeals courts ............ but, in this case, as noted above, Trump was punished for his continued defaming of Ms. Carroll after the first verdict. So, the jury concluded that a much larger verdict might shut Trump up. Which it did. By no longer defaming E. Jean Carroll after the $83 million award, Trump has perfectly supported the award amount. Let's say an appeals court chops the second award down to $10 million, and then Trump starts defaming Ms. Carroll again. Does the Appeals court have to say they are sorry? Probably, there would further litigation, and an even bigger award, and then an appeal to reduce the award. What does the Appeals court do then? Increase the award? The award to the plaintiff has got to be big enough to protect her from future defamation.

Some of tge Trump fluffers here would go to jail for Trump in an instant. But, clearly Judge Engoron is thrashing about in an unprecedented situation, as a key witness thinks about pleading to perjury in the trial. Perhaps the Trump fans here have some advice. Nope, no independent thought from them, if its not in a talking point, they can't post it. So, my opinion is that Engoron has to work around Weisselberg and make a decision.

https://silverstateelection.nv.gov/nvother/index.shtml As usual, you are wrong. Joe Biden took 89% in a crowded field. Not "close" and not "unopposed".

An opinion piece about data is not the same as data. How about FBI data? All you are saying now is the official data doesn't back you up.

Yes, this is not the long awaited appeal of the first verdict. BTW, the appeal of the second verdict is on hold, due to technical issues.

Here's a fact: Joe Biden just won the Nevada primary.

Tell us more about this increase in crime. Do you have any data to back up your opinion? Or are you just repeating mindless talking points?

If you take out the bad parts, Trump looks pretty good.