Search results

That would be the security strip - one wavy gold colored strip, placed right where his combover would go. You could only see it when you hold the bill up to the light which, coincidentally, would also make his skin appear more orange.

No, these claims were attested to by folks under oath.

I'd be okay with putting Trump on a $34 bill.

wat

Meaning that the activity may not have occurred while you lived there and were privy to local gossip. The guy's 71. He'd hardly be the first person to grow more vocally bigoted with age.

The lawyer who worked with this guy said that he didn't start witnessing these behaviors until after you left.

Here's a copy of the indictment so you can read the charges yourself: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf Here's a link to the pertinent legal statute: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10 Here's the wikipedia page describing the...

Anything is possible, but the claims from the lawyer are pulled from a deposition he gave in another, unrelated case. He was asked about that language; he didn't volunteer it. The OP article linked to the deposition, which you can read for yourself. The relevant section starts on page 61...

Back the blue?

Of course, the flip side of this is that it's easy to come to other conclusions when you're not swallowing right-wing propaganda all day.

I think I can speak for most of my fellow partisans when I say we'd be happy to trade this conviction for those regarding the insurrection. Personally, I'm curious to see how long the jury deliberates in the documents case. They were pretty fast in this one, and it was much less of a slam dunk.

Because, at least according to the article's description of things, they applied the "medical emergency" standard when it wasn't legally required.

Go back and read the part of the article that I quoted, specifically the last sentence.

Full Acrobat or Acrobat Reader?

In some ways, yes, I do. In other ways, no, I don’t. Somebody had to pick up that torch.

The one where the decision was made that the threshold for a D&C was not met.

Why would you think I missed that? Did you read my comment? I pointed the finger at the hospital.

Maybe other people did hear it. We only know of two people cited in one article.

What did you use to open it? I tried Chrome, Edge, and the Acrobat Reader desktop app, and had the same results in all of them. That's the page where I found the pdf. The numbers are all meaningless without an explanation of what they're supposedly measuring.