The View laughing and mocking Trump as the justice system attempts to take his property, his finances, and everything he worked for his entire life.
Keep laughing, Whoopi "I didn't go to Epstein Island" Goldberg.
Trump will get the last laugh. pic.twitter.com/Oi6LBERsOY

— Green Lives Matter (@Ultrafrog17) March 21, 2024

Debating policy is good, but.........

.@OMAROSA: "If Donald Trump had the money, he would not be asking for special favors from the judge… But in this case, he's going to have to pay or he just will have his property seized and that is his worst nightmare… The curtain is going to be pulled back. His supporters are… pic.twitter.com/oNYXCA5ZMn

— Abby D. Phillip (@abbydphillip) March 19, 2024

His followers will pay, even though Trump has said on Truth he in fact does have the cash. This is after his lawyers have argued that he doesn't.

Are any of these billionaires liquid enough for this kind of judgement?

caryking said:

---

Are any of these billionaires liquid enough for this kind of judgement?

---

Good question? I'm not sure how any of this works.

Buzzosborne said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Buzzosborne said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Buzzosborne said:

---

caryking said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

Trump gonna get the money? Or is he going to start taking money from foreign countries? His lawyer mentioned that is an option. I guess it wouldn't matter to the cult either way. The GOP had a great opportunity to take out Biden and win the Senate back, keep the House. Instead we have a circus with two horrible candidates. In the end we are the ones that are going to lose. I guess you get the government we deserve.

---

What policy do you disagree with Trump?

---

What policies of Trump did you like? Don't say things were better then, of course the pandemic caused a lot of harm to the economy and everything else. What Trump policies did you support?

---

Others can add on, a couple quick ones:
- Energy policy
- Border security and executive orders he had in place
- Taxes (tax relief)
- Smaller government
- Foreign policy
- Withdraw from Paris climate accord
- Biological women's/girl's rights, title IX
- Fewer regulatory changes that impact consumers, less regulation
- no push on climate agenda

---

Specifically what energy policy?
What did he actually accomplish on border security?
You were good with him ballooning the deficit with tax cuts?
Were you in favor of the tariffs on imported lumber and steel?

---

You asked for policies and now you're asking for justifications and pointing out things you didn't like? Everyone can play that game. Regarding Biden's energy policy:
- Are you ok with ending fossil fuels?
- Are you ok with forcing EVs on consumers and other energy related mandates Biden continues to push?
- Are you ok with 50K government climate change jobs?
- Are you ok with the US increasing its dependency on China for EV natural resources and batteries?
- Are you ok with American citizens/consumers taking the brunt of Biden's climate agenda policies and costs while countries like China continue to build coal plants?

---

Why are you bringing up Biden? I see a lot of people saying that while Trump may be an ahole, they like his policies. Yet not one of them can name the policies of Trump that they approved of. Including you, apparently.

---

It was obvious where you were headed. Decided to throw it back at you, right out of the liberal playbook.

If a poster says they like Biden's energy policies, I know exactly what that means. If someone tells you they like Trumps energy policies, you also know what that means.

packofwolves said:

---

Buzzosborne said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Buzzosborne said:

---

packofwolves said:

---

Buzzosborne said:

---

caryking said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

Trump gonna get the money? Or is he going to start taking money from foreign countries? His lawyer mentioned that is an option. I guess it wouldn't matter to the cult either way. The GOP had a great opportunity to take out Biden and win the Senate back, keep the House. Instead we have a circus with two horrible candidates. In the end we are the ones that are going to lose. I guess you get the government we deserve.

---

What policy do you disagree with Trump?

---

What policies of Trump did you like? Don't say things were better then, of course the pandemic caused a lot of harm to the economy and everything else. What Trump policies did you support?

---

Others can add on, a couple quick ones:
- Energy policy
- Border security and executive orders he had in place
- Taxes (tax relief)
- Smaller government
- Foreign policy
- Withdraw from Paris climate accord
- Biological women's/girl's rights, title IX
- Fewer regulatory changes that impact consumers, less regulation
- no push on climate agenda

---

Specifically what energy policy?
What did he actually accomplish on border security?
You were good with him ballooning the deficit with tax cuts?
Were you in favor of the tariffs on imported lumber and steel?

---

You asked for policies and now you're asking for justifications and pointing out things you didn't like? Everyone can play that game. Regarding Biden's energy policy:
- Are you ok with ending fossil fuels?
- Are you ok with forcing EVs on consumers and other energy related mandates Biden continues to push?
- Are you ok with 50K government climate change jobs?
- Are you ok with the US increasing its dependency on China for EV natural resources and batteries?
- Are you ok with American citizens/consumers taking the brunt of Biden's climate agenda policies and costs while countries like China continue to build coal plants?

---

Why are you bringing up Biden? I see a lot of people saying that while Trump may be an ahole, they like his policies. Yet not one of them can name the policies of Trump that they approved of. Including you, apparently.

---

It was obvious where you were headed. Decided to throw it back at you, right out of the liberal playbook.

If a poster says they like Biden's energy policies, I know exactly what that means. If someone tells you they like Trumps energy policies, you also know what that means.

---

I guess what he doesn't realize is: your questions were asked because those things wouldn't go forward in a Trump administration. So, unfortunately, we have to undue everything, as you stated, and that becomes policy!…

Liberals push the envelope and when moderates to conservatives push back, well… they become authoritarians!

It's a screwed up world we live in…

caryking said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Are any of these billionaires liquid enough for this kind of judgement?

---

Good question? I'm not sure how any of this works.

---

Elon Musk is the, or one of the, wealthiest people in the world. When he bought Twitter, he was no where near liquid enough, to do it on his own. Heck, even if was just 450M, he wouldn't have been liquid enough. These people don't keep that kind of cash around…

---

Is the question of significance, are billionaries liquid enough to drop $450M at the drop of a hat?

Or is there a more significant question we ask ourselves, I ask.

Werewolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

ncsupack1 said:

---

caryking said:

---

Are any of these billionaires liquid enough for this kind of judgement?

---

Good question? I'm not sure how any of this works.

---

Elon Musk is the, or one of the, wealthiest people in the world. When he bought Twitter, he was no where near liquid enough, to do it on his own. Heck, even if was just 450M, he wouldn't have been liquid enough. These people don't keep that kind of cash around…

---

Is the question of significance, are billionaries liquid enough to drop $450M at the drop of a hat?

Or is there a more significant question we ask ourselves, I ask.

---

Were, you've been reading so much "Q" stuff, you're starting to post in the same cryptic way…

If you believe something, say it…

A question to ask ourselves? What is pertinent here.......really? Each of us must answer this question for ourselves. If billionaire liquidity is the question to answer then so be it.

caryking said:

---

Are any of these billionaires liquid enough for this kind of judgement?

---

Maybe this is the reason? Just a thought.

🇺🇸KAMALA: “TRUMP WILL WEAPONIZE THE DEPT OF JUSTICE”

Meanwhile… Trump battles 91+ lawsuits. pic.twitter.com/53zW4nQeLw

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) March 22, 2024

Our country is being systematically taken down and fellow R's question whether billionaire Trump is liquid enough to pay a half $1 billion civil penalty? Really, that's a point of interest and concern at this juncture? Create a thread about the liquidity of a billionaire....rather than one anout a tyrannical govt abusing its power thru DOJ etc.

Credit where credit is due, you are inching along steadily,

Werewolf said:

---

Our country is being systematically taken down and fellow R's question whether billionaire Trump is liquid enough to pay a half $1 billion civil penalty? Really, that's a point of interest and concern at this juncture? Create a thread about the liquidity of a billionaire....rather than one anout a tyrannical govt abusing its power thru DOJ etc.

Credit where credit is due, you are inching along steadily,

---

Were, I think we are talking about both issues. I believe, without a doubt, what's going on is a witch-hunt towards Trump. At the same time, NY gave a ruling; so, a conversation about Trump's liquidity is fair. The media, is making this about his inability to post the bond, and I'm saying virtually no one is liquid enough to do it.

Yes, the real issue at hand is the onslaught of litigation against Trump and everyone knows what's going on…. If not, then whatever…

As if anyone needed another reason to vote for Trump - he's now said that if Prince Harry lied about his drug use on his visa application he'd have him deported when he becomes President. Prince Harry has admitted to drug use in his book Spare and in several interviews. It's also interesting to note that the Biden Administration is refusing to make the application public.

caryking said:

---

barelypure said:

---

As if anyone needed another reason to vote for Trump - he's now said that if Prince Harry lied about his drug use on his visa application he'd have him deported when he becomes President. Prince Harry has admitted to drug use in his book Spare and in several interviews. It's also interesting to note that the Biden Administration is refusing to make the application public.

---

Personally, I don't think that's an issue we need to concern ourselves with. I don't know how this started and if he was baited, by a question, then that's an example where I wish Trump wouldn't respond.

---

Agree.

So reported one of the 1st pieces of property James is looking to seize is the century-old Seven Springs mansion. It is 230 acres, built in 1919, the mansion has 60 rooms, 15 bedrooms, three swimming pools, and a bowling alley.

Going by how they set the value of Mar-a-lago this will hardly put a dent in what Trump owes. I suspect the judge would place a value somewhere in the $2 million range for this mansion in Westchester. If they undervalue everything Trump owns he could be left with no real estate holdings and still owe the bulk of the money.

barelypure said:

---

So reported one of the 1st pieces of property James is looking to seize is the century-old Seven Springs mansion. It is 230 acres, built in 1919, the mansion has 60 rooms, 15 bedrooms, three swimming pools, and a bowling alley.

Going by how they set the value of Mar-a-lago this will hardly put a dent in what Trump owes. I suspect the judge would place a value somewhere in the $2 million range for this mansion in Westchester. If they undervalue everything Trump owns he could be left with no real estate holdings and still owe the bulk of the money.

---

Whatever is seized, she better not do anything with it. The penalty will be reduced on appeal. She knows this.

packofwolves said:

---

barelypure said:

---

So reported one of the 1st pieces of property James is looking to seize is the century-old Seven Springs mansion. It is 230 acres, built in 1919, the mansion has 60 rooms, 15 bedrooms, three swimming pools, and a bowling alley.

Going by how they set the value of Mar-a-lago this will hardly put a dent in what Trump owes. I suspect the judge would place a value somewhere in the $2 million range for this mansion in Westchester. If they undervalue everything Trump owns he could be left with no real estate holdings and still owe the bulk of the money.

---

Whatever is seized, she better not do anything with it. The penalty will be reduced on appeal. She knows this.

---

One would hope.

If they undervalue the property, seize it and sell it, and Trump wins on appeal wouldn't he just receive the undervalued amount plus any interest and not the true value of the property.

IOW they seize Mar-a-lago they say is only worth $18 million and on appeal that's what he's paid. I can see that happening if they have their way.

Civilized said:

---

barelypure said:

---

As if anyone needed another reason to vote for Trump - he's now said that if Prince Harry lied about his drug use on his visa application he'd have him deported when he becomes President. Prince Harry has admitted to drug use in his book Spare and in several interviews. It's also interesting to note that the Biden Administration is refusing to make the application public.

---

Is this a joke?

---

Why would it be?

America is SICK of gutless, GOP traitors like Mike Johnson and Co.
WORSE than Democrats! pic.twitter.com/IK2EfVXC5N

— ULTRA MAGA PARTY 👑 (@MaxEvansUMP) March 23, 2024

At this rate the Democrats are going to have a Dem as speaker. What is it now, a one vote lead?

Civilized said:

---

barelypure said:

---

As if anyone needed another reason to vote for Trump - he's now said that if Prince Harry lied about his drug use on his visa application he'd have him deported when he becomes President. Prince Harry has admitted to drug use in his book Spare and in several interviews. It's also interesting to note that the Biden Administration is refusing to make the application public.

---

Is this a joke?

---

Why would you doubt me? I realize I'm a new kid on the block but...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-suggests-prince-harry-deported-drug-use-rcna144105

For the record, I'm not convinced Mike Johnson is a bad R. Certain events are required for a desired effect.

Do you recall this painting from Jon McNaughton @mcnaughtonart?

Crossing The Swamp carrying the light of truth to bring us hope for a prosperous future.

“The best is yet to come.” ~ President Trump pic.twitter.com/Riybkn8fND

— Trump 2024 - America First (@TrumpMAGADONIAN) January 29, 2020

Wufskins said:

---

Republicans in the House are a clown show. Rats abandoning ship too.

---

I agree! They don't fight like Dems do. Dems play smash mouth politics; and, Reps try and play by the rules…. They are weak!!!

caryking said:

---

Wufskins said:

---

Republicans in the House are a clown show. Rats abandoning ship too.

---

I agree! They don't fight like Dems do. Dems play smash mouth politics; and, Reps try and play by the rules…. They are weak!!!

---

Democrats are by and large very much united in their cause. Something that the Republicans have never been good at in my life time. They also, have in my opinion better leadership.

caryking said:

---

Wufskins said:

---

Republicans in the House are a clown show. Rats abandoning ship too.

---

I agree! They don't fight like Dems do. Dems play smash mouth politics; and, Reps try and play by the rules…. They are weak!!!

---

What does that even mean?

RINOs are well compensated....to lose the WWF main bouts.....a slippery well concealed path to what we face today.....

Wufskins said:

---

caryking said:

---

Wufskins said:

---

Republicans in the House are a clown show. Rats abandoning ship too.

---

I agree! They don't fight like Dems do. Dems play smash mouth politics; and, Reps try and play by the rules…. They are weak!!!

---

What does that even mean?

---

It means that Dems are far more convicted in their actions! Reps are timid and try to be nice. I beleive they think far more about the next election than fighting. If Reps had fighters, like Dems, then we would push harder to their policies.

Remember in 2017, Trump had a Republican Congress (both chambers) and still could get his agenda through. It's exactly what he campaigned on and the Reps were weak, even in power. 2 years later, Nancy is back in control of the house and she managed her agenda perfectly. If Johnson would watch Nancy's leadership, he could learn something. Again, too weak!!!