Rudy Giuliani ordered to pay $150 million in defamation case

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

They are chosen based on voir dire which both sides participate in.

Nice use of ' Latin ' there mate . I'm Impressed . voir dire means nothing more than an Oath to tell the Truth .

Yes Both sides Participate but none the less a Jury is a room of people who are told what to think and chosen based on how they think .

Regardless, America's Mayo didn't show everyone all the evidence he had because, this might be a shock, he doesn't have any.

Hey you're probably right , But we shall see .

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Xtrozero

Unfortunately Rudy and co had no evidence to substantiate their Boss' wild claims.

Do you have any evidence for yours?

Seems the Kraken was a no show.

Evidence ?

We have all the Evidence we need , We all saw it happen on election night . I get it if perhaps you want to repress the memory but it did happen.

They stopped the count on election night . That has never happened ever in the history of this country. Trump was in the lead then they stopped the count and there was a Media Black out on the count and then Presto it comes back up and Biden is in the lead .

That is Fraud .

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

"a Jury is a room of people who are told what to think."

No, they just are not. From my considerable experience of jury trials.

Unless things are wildly different over the Pond?

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
Nice use of ' Latin ' there mate . I'm Impressed .

You're impressed by common knowledge?

Yes Both sides Participate but none the less a Jury is a room of people who are told what to think and chosen based on how they think .

Of course they're chosen by what they say and attest to on the jury questionnaire, that's the entire point of the voir dire process. What they think in deliberations is up to them based on how they process the testimony and evidence.

Hey you're probably right ,

Uh, no, I'm definitely right. Rudy's broke ass proves it.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Should have been easy to prove, then?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Should have been easy to prove, then?

From an Objective standpoint I feel it has been proved . In fact I feel it's Obvious .

And I say that not from some Trumpy soapbox pounding my chest , I could care less about the man I'm just expressing what I saw on election night and the fiasco that followed.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
From an Objective standpoint I feel it has been proved .

That's nice. When Rudy goes to a Court of Objective Opinion and not a Court of Law maybe that will count for something.

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

No need for actual evidence or proof, then?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
From an Objective standpoint I feel it has been proved .

That's nice. When Rudy goes to a Court of Objective Opinion and not a Court of Law maybe that will count for something.

So you admit from an Objective standpoint 2020 was fraud .... I'm just teasing .

But because of the Laws of corrupt men and the Corrupt DOJ the Fraud is almost impossible to prove in a " Court of Law " . So we should just sit on our hands and accept it .

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Yes, it's impossible to prove stuff in a Court of Law if you don't have any..... evidence?

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
But because of the Laws of corrupt men and the Corrupt DOJ the Fraud is almost impossible to prove in a " Court of Law " . So we should just sit on our hands and accept it .

LOL. AHAHAHAHA.

Sure.

Let me know when the evidence finally gets presented in court.

ATTENTION...please read before posting further....

BE AWARE THAT IF YOUR POST IS NOT ON TOPIC AND/OR IS ABOUT OTHER MEMBERS YOU MAY BE ABOUT TO HAVE POSTS REMOVED. OR YOU MAY BE TEMPORARILY POST BANNED!
AND, PLEASE REMEMBER THERE IS NO MORE MUD PIT....MUD NOT ALLOWED.

Everyone and I mean everyone is allowed to post here on topic and to do so without being called names or becoming the target of others' posts. Debate the topic and leave each other out of it. OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS are encouraged.
Those who refuse to get that concept may be POST BANNED!!!

These rules apply to all threads and if you want to engage in personal attacks there are other sites on the Internet where you can do that. Our goal is for ATS to be above that. For members here to post like mature adults.
YOU are responsible for your own posts

And, as always...
Do not reply to this post.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Let me know when the evidence finally gets presented in court.

Evidence has been brought fourth and rejected many times over so You mean when it is finally Accepted into a Court of Law . Yes I'll let you know though we will probably be in a civil war by then so ....... you know Priorities .

a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Can you cite any of this "evidence"?

Not seen any, which seems to be why his and Sydney's suits got thrown out?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It's totally going to be in the next case. If not that one, definitely the one after that. But also we want to delay the trial until after the election for...reasons.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
Evidence has been brought fourth and rejected many times over so...

It appears you only like the legal process when it confirms your bias. In the real world Rudy hasn't won. In baseball terms he's batting .000%.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
It's totally going to be in the next case. If not that one, definitely the one after that. But also we want to delay the trial until after the election for...reasons.

It makes total sense to sit on exonerating evidence until just the right moment, decades from now, when you can tick-tock that out for the big win. It's a brilliant legal strategy because you never have to back it up in court. Ever.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: asabuvsobelow

Can you cite any of this "evidence"?

Not seen any, which seems to be why his and Sydney's suits got thrown out?

would you consider using the entire IC and DOJ to hide evidence of scummy behavior by the dem candidate just prior to an election to be any sort of hindrance to a fair election?