avenatti has some serious legal troubles of his own

[Go Braves]

commentary is all that has been presented here - let's see the links to the released documents so i can read them myself

What's been provided for you far exceeds what you provided for us when you started this thread about Avenatti's case.

 

[Truthfrees]

What's been provided for you far exceeds what you provided for us when you started this thread about Avenatti's case.

not at all - i posted an article about a case happening - and said i am interested in seeing how this works out

you said all kinds of unprovable things against trump and have yet to provide court documents to prove even 1 of your many claims

so until you can prove it this whole thread is opinion unproven by fact

 

[Go Braves]

not at all - i posted an article about a case happening - and said i am interested in seeing how this works out

you said all kinds of unprovable things against trump and have yet to provide court documents to prove even 1 of your many claims

so until you can prove it this whole thread is opinion unproven by fact

You posted a MSM article about a case that is happening but insisted that MSM articles about the cases against Trump weren't credible. Lol. What I said was proven by multiple legitimate sources, by multiple folks with integrity.

 

[Truthfrees]

You posted a MSM article about a case that is happening but insisted that MSM articles about the cases against Trump weren't credible. Lol. What I said was proven by multiple legitimate sources, by multiple folks with integrity.

in your opinion - not mine

the msm article is opinion - this discussion is opinion

you keep trying to claim exclusive ownership of truth

if you can agree that you have your opinion based on your favorite msm articles just as we all do we can move on

if you keep insisting you alone hold truth and those who disagree with you are absent of truth we will keep going in circles

 

[Go Braves]

in your opinion - not mine

the msm article is opinion - this discussion is opinion

Ok, by that lolgic it's merely your opinion that Avenatti is in serious legal troubles of his own.

you keep trying to claim exclusive ownership of truth

Nope. I have consistently provided facts that you do not accept on account of them not being to your liking.

if you can agree that you have your opinion based on your favorite msm articles just as we all do we can move on

You used the LA Times as your source to seed this thread, which you placed in the News section, not one of the sections for sharing opinions. The article contains facts. The same source has also had articles about Trump's lawsuits that also contain facts that corroborate what the sources I & other folks have posted for you.

What you've shown us is that when a source posts something favorable about Trump or that is unfavorable about Trump's opponents, you gladly accept it. But when the same source posts something unfavorable about him, you reject it as mere opinion.

if you keep insisting you alone hold truth and those who disagree with you are absent of truth we will keep going in circles

Not once have I insisted that, nor have the other folks here whose posts have been congruent with mine. You need to apply that sentence to yourself.

The one thing correct in what you've posted here is that we're going in circles. It's a game of pigeon chess. It's been fun sharing your posts for lulz tho. I'll unsubscribe to this thread now. You've perfectly proven my point, regardless of whether you realize that or not.

 

[Truthfrees]

Ok, by that lolgic it's merely your opinion that Avenatti is in serious legal troubles of his own.

Nope. I have consistently provided facts that you do not accept on account of them not being to your liking.

You used the LA Times as your source to seed this thread, which you placed in the News section, not one of the sections for sharing opinions. The article contains facts. The same source has also had articles about Trump's lawsuits that also contain facts that corroborate what the sources I & other folks have posted for you.

What you've shown us is that when a source posts something favorable about Trump or that is unfavorable about Trump's opponents, you gladly accept it. But when the same source posts something unfavorable about him, you reject it as mere opinion.

Not once have I insisted that, nor have the other folks here whose posts have been congruent with mine. You need to apply that sentence to yourself.

The one thing correct in what you've posted here is that we're going in circles. It's a game of pigeon chess. It's been fun sharing your posts for lulz tho. I'll unsubscribe to this thread now. You've perfectly proven my point, regardless of whether you realize that or not.

well then i guess we continue to disagree - and proving your point with msm articles will continue to be unconvincing

produce the court documents and then let's see what can be proven

i'm guessing the released court documents did not confirm the article and that is why the article did not link to them

 

[Go Braves]

well then i guess we continue to disagree - and proving your point with msm articles will continue to be unconvincing

produce the court documents and then let's see what can be proven

Lol. I suspect you'll keep on making new threads in the News & Current Events section using MSM articles as your sources & insist that they're convincing & truthful so long as they say something favorable about Donald or negative about 1 of his many opponents.

i'm guessing the released court documents did not confirm the article and that is why the article did not link to them

Are you talking about your LA Times article about Avenatti's case? OK. Maybe you should move this thread to a section for talking about opinions instead of the news?

 

[FreeinChrist]

well then i guess we continue to disagree - and proving your point with msm articles will continue to be unconvincing

produce the court documents and then let's see what can be proven

i'm guessing the released court documents did not confirm the article and that is why the article did not link to them

They did agree with what we are saying. You need to look them up.

here is a link:
https://static.politico.com/25/88/783a0dca43a0a898f3973da0086f/trump-university-playbook.pdf

 

[FreeinChrist]

Here Are Trump University's Aggressive Sales 'Playbooks'

Trump University gave employees detailed instructions on how to entice people to enroll in its real estate seminars, from targeting people making at least $90,000 a year and choosing words of flattery that are most persuasive to picking music for the gatherings — The O’Jays’ “For the Love of Money.”

The “playbooks” for the now-defunct business owned by Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, were unsealed Tuesday in a class-action lawsuit by customers who say they were defrauded. Last Friday, a judge who has earned Trump’s scorn sided with attorneys for The Washington Post who argued that the public had a right to know what was previously confidential.

The documents outline how employees should guide customers through “the roller coaster of emotions” once they have expressed interest.​

 

[Truthfrees]

Lol. I suspect you'll keep on making new threads in the News & Current Events section using MSM articles as your sources & insist that they're convincing & truthful so long as they say something favorable about Donald or negative about 1 of his many opponents.

Are you talking about your LA Times article about Avenatti's case? OK. Maybe you should move this thread to a section for talking about opinions instead of the news?

lol - don't have the court documents do you?

 

[Truthfrees]

They did agree with what we are saying. You need to look them up.

here is a link:
https://static.politico.com/25/88/783a0dca43a0a898f3973da0086f/trump-university-playbook.pdf

that is the tu playbook - where are the court documents including the judge's words?

 

[Truthfrees]

Here Are Trump University's Aggressive Sales 'Playbooks'

Trump University gave employees detailed instructions on how to entice people to enroll in its real estate seminars, from targeting people making at least $90,000 a year and choosing words of flattery that are most persuasive to picking music for the gatherings — The O’Jays’ “For the Love of Money.”

The “playbooks” for the now-defunct business owned by Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for president, were unsealed Tuesday in a class-action lawsuit by customers who say they were defrauded. Last Friday, a judge who has earned Trump’s scorn sided with attorneys for The Washington Post who argued that the public had a right to know what was previously confidential.

The documents outline how employees should guide customers through “the roller coaster of emotions” once they have expressed interest.​

what page of the playbook does that?

where is the judge's words / decision?

where are the documents for the written surveys by the happy students the article claimed were released?

 

[FreeinChrist]

lol - don't have the court documents do you?

Do you? You moved the goalposts.

LOL. It is your choice to ignore the statement of the attorney general of NY. I see nothing to dissuade me from the view I hold.

Find the statement by the judge that it was not fraud. You won't.

 

[FreeinChrist]

that is the tu playbook - where are the court documents including the judge's words?

The playbook was ordered released by the judge.
You have already been told the court documents are held because Trump was elected.
So we have to go by what others involved in the case say, and by the fact that Trump had to settle.

And if the AG of New York was wrong in calling it fraudulent - why didn't Trump sue him like he always did to others who said things about him he didn't like?

 

[Truthfrees]

Do you? You moved the goalposts.

LOL. It is your choice to ignore the statement of the attorney general of NY. I see nothing to dissuade me from the view I hold.

Find the statement by the judge that it was not fraud. You won't.

lol - the opinion of schneiderman who has never liked trump and attacks him any chance he gets?

gee i wonder why i wouldn't trust him

i have no illusions that i could dissuade you - but just know that i feel the same - i see nothing to dissuade me from my opinion either

without the court documents - like the judge's words - i will have to trust those i feel are trustworthy and disregard what is unconvincing

show me the judge's words - i bet they won't say fraud - no one quotes the judge's words - so he must have said something different than all these articles claim as the reason for the judgement

 

[Truthfrees]

The playbook was ordered released by the judge.
You have already been told the court documents are held because Trump was elected.
So we have to go by what others involved in the case say, and by the fact that Trump had to settle.

And if the AG of New York was wrong in calling it fraudulent - why didn't Trump sue him like he always did to others who said things about him he didn't like?

well the judge's words/judgement surely are not held because trump was elected

and if they are then i guess no one can prove anything either way

i'm certainly not going to trust msm or schneiderman or any other person that has a long history of attacking trump

 

[Go Braves]

lol - don't have the court documents do you?

lol - don't have the court documents do you? For your thread topic? Did you forget what it is?

 

[Go Braves]

Do you? You moved the goalposts.

LOL. It is your choice to ignore the statement of the attorney general of NY. I see nothing to dissuade me from the view I hold.

Find the statement by the judge that it was not fraud. You won't.

Folks reading through this thread who care about facts have already seen the statement from the AG, your links, mine, to know that the goals have been scored.

 

[Truthfrees]

lol - don't have the court documents do you? For your thread topic? Did you forget what it is?

lol - moving the goalposts i see -

View attachment 243970

Folks reading through this thread who care about facts have already seen the statement from the AG, your links, mine, to know that the goals have been scored.

yes and we are all impressed with your lack of evidence

 

[USincognito]

not for fraud - check it out

$25M deal over Trump University fraud lawsuits moves forward

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld an agreement requiring President Donald Trump to pay $25 million to settle lawsuits accusing his now-defunct Trump University of fraud.​