bemeruca:


IjeBos or dahighlife should by now think men can menstruate because some professors says so.

Using triangulation, you can get a sense where someone may be using cell towers. And these days, smart phones log many useful data to the network they connect to.

Thanks I get it. Soon we shall have power points and excel sheets

Wrt phone data geolocation I had not seen elsewhere that AT&T were the providers. Which makes it more credible. I would say it's 100% spot on.

basilico:


Thanks I get it. Soon we shall have power points and excel sheets

Wrt phone data geolocation I had not seen elsewhere that AT&T were the providers. Which makes it more credible. I would say it's 100% spot on.

The professors he is referencing may be living in the 80s.

basilico:


Have you ever questioned anything democrats an the left do?

Lol, he does not especially when it is about child grooming or pedophilia.

basilico:


https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/interest-rate?continent=africa

LMAO! You are finished. Bwahahahahaahahaha!

Lol, Alvin Bragg is not trusted to punish murderers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPEPubWtK4A

basilico:


Have you ever questioned anything democrats an the left do?

Yes I do. And I don't make up false conspiracies when I don't approve of what they do.

Poor stupid Fanni Willis!

According to an affidavit written by private investigator Charles Mittelstadt, he received AT&T records from the company's Subpoena Compliance Center documenting the call and text history as well the location data of the number belonging to Wade.

"Upon receipt [of the requested records], I began an analysis using a Leads Online analytics tool called CellHawk. CellHawk is considered by law enforcement to be the gold standard in cell phone records analytics. It is used throughout the United States and Georgia by law enforcement agencies" and "should be well known" to the DA's office..."Mittelstadt wrote. "A cornerstone of the CellHawk analytics tool is the inability to manipulate the data. Data is uploaded as received by the cell provider custodian."


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/miacathell/2024/02/26/fani-willis-phone-data-n2635664

Where is dahighlife. I got this from townhall.com
Yes townhall.com

bemeruca:


The professors he is referencing may be living in the 80s.

Please paste that ajc article. I can't open it due to my geolocation. Or those names of the Georgia tech .
I can't see that reporting anywhere else.

budaatum:



Yes I do. And I don't make up false conspiracies when I don't approve of what they do.

Poor stupid Fanni Willis!

Do you remember Michael Flynn was almost bankrupted because FBI accuse him if lying?
What should happen to Fani should serve as a lesson.

basilico:


Please paste that ajc article. I can't open it due to my geolocation. Or those names of the Georgia tech .
I can't see that reporting anywhere else.

This is a pdf of the webpage

basilico:
According to an affidavit written by private investigator Charles Mittelstadt, he received AT&T records from the company's Subpoena Compliance Center documenting the call and text history as well the location data of the number belonging to Wade.

"Upon receipt [of the requested records], I began an analysis using a Leads Online analytics tool called CellHawk. CellHawk is considered by law enforcement to be the gold standard in cell phone records analytics. It is used throughout the United States and Georgia by law enforcement agencies" and "should be well known" to the DA's office..."Mittelstadt wrote. "A cornerstone of the CellHawk analytics tool is the inability to manipulate the data. Data is uploaded as received by the cell provider custodian."


https://townhall.com/tipsheet/miacathell/2024/02/26/fani-willis-phone-data-n2635664

Where is dahighlife. I got this from townhall.com
Yes townhall.com

There is a specific type of limited data that defense counsel can obtain from AT&T with just a counsel's subpoena and without a court order. AT&T outlines this in their data compliance information. The Trump team's investigators obtained this data from AT&T within approximately 7 days, including a weekend. (I say this as I still have concerns about the quick turnaround and how legally they obtained this info, whether/how they notified Wade in that time to potentially challenge the subpoena, and if not, the privacy ramifications of any counsel being able to access such data.) They received the limited information and the investigator ran his report on it. I won't delve into the details. You can find more detail by searching for AT&T's letter to the FEC titled "Location Data Retention and Sharing Policies of AT&T Mobility."

In his report, the investigator stated, "I constructed a very conservative geofence which isolated the two cell towers in closest proximity to this address (one roughly 3000’ and the other 2000’ away)." So, he used two towers to analyze Wade's location. However, the 'tri' in triangulation implies the need for three towers to accurately triangulate a location, hence the potentially wide margin of error in terms of accuracy, spanning miles, as accounted to by the Engineering Professor (I've included his bio below. However, I am confident that your expertise in conspiracy theories will match his academic qualifications from MIT and Stanford). My question to you is, if you clearly lack understanding of the details here, as you evidently do, why invest so much time discussing and perpetuating misinformation instead of dedicating that time to learning about it?

I've spent a considerable amount of time recently rebutting conspiracy theories propagated by Basilico and now bemeurca, who inundate this thread with such misinformation. It's time consuming. More so, constructive comments are drowned out by the influx of falsehoods and conspiracies, making for an unproductive and unenjoyable discussion space. I'll check back later, hoping they'll have found more constructive uses of their time. Cheerio

basilico:


Do you remember Michael Flynn was almost bankrupted because FBI accuse him if lying?
What should happen to Fani should serve as a lesson.

Flynn's case was not determined in court and bears no relationship to Fanni Willis, whom if guilty should be punished.

Point is, I do condemn Democrats when I disapprove of what they do, unlike you who's head is so up dump's ass you stinks of his poo and even new arrivals smell you are a waste of time.

DaHighLife:


There is a specific type of limited data that defense counsel can obtain from AT&T with just a counsel's subpoena and without a court order. AT&T outlines this in their data compliance information. The Trump team's investigators obtained this data from AT&T within approximately 7 days, including a weekend. (I say this as I still have concerns about the quick turnaround and how legally they obtained this info, whether/how they notified Wade in that time to potentially challenge the subpoena, and if not, the privacy ramifications of any counsel being able to access such data.) They received the limited information and the investigator ran his report on it. I won't delve into the details. You can find more detail by searching for AT&T's letter to the FEC titled "Location Data Retention and Sharing Policies of AT&T Mobility."

In his report, the investigator stated, "I constructed a very conservative geofence which isolated the two cell towers in closest proximity to this address (one roughly 3000’ and the other 2000’ away)." So, he used two towers to analyze Wade's location. However, the 'tri' in triangulation implies the need for three towers to accurately triangulate a location, hence the potentially wide margin of error in terms of accuracy, spanning miles, as accounted to by the Engineering Professor (I've included his bio below. However, I am confident that your expertise in conspiracy theories will match his academic qualifications from MIT and Stanford). My question to you is, if you clearly lack understanding of the details here, as you evidently do, why invest so much time discussing and perpetuating misinformation instead of dedicating that time to learning about it?

I've spent a considerable amount of time recently rebutting conspiracy theories propagated by Basilico and now bemeurca, who inundate this thread with such misinformation. It's time consuming. More so, constructive comments are drowned out by the influx of falsehoods and conspiracies, making for an unproductive and unenjoyable discussion space. I'll check back later, hoping they'll have found more constructive uses of their time. Cheerio

You don't care about the allege misconduct. They are leftwing nuts so you want to try and discredit anything they put out.

There are other professors talking about how this new evidence can prove Wade n fani was in relationship prior....

Which professor do you believe?

DaHighLife:

My question to you is, if you clearly lack understanding of the details here, as you evidently do, why invest so much time discussing and perpetuating misinformation instead of dedicating that time to learning about it?

For the attention he gets, that's why he's here. And to stop constructive conversations from going on least we achieve anything worthwhile like learn from each other.

DaHighLife:
I've spent a considerable amount of time recently rebutting conspiracy theories propagated by Basilico and now bemeurca, who inundate this thread with such misinformation. It's time consuming. More so, constructive comments are drowned out by the influx of falsehoods and conspiracies, making for an unproductive and unenjoyable discussion space. I'll check back later, hoping they'll have found more constructive uses of their time. Cheerio

And this shows how successful they are. Because, instead of conversing with those who might be worth one's attention and considerable amount of time and might have learned something, some spend their time giving attention to the naughty kids in class who don't want to learn and don't want others to learn, sadly.

It's bad teachers falling for strategy straight out the qanon playbook.

bemeruca:


i know but use the insurance and help yourself because you are sick.
if your insurance covers opinions then it is more reason why you have to seek help.

You seem to be stuck on repeat, like a broken record player skipping the "constructive criticism" track. Maybe it's time you invested in a new comeback and a self-awareness upgrade, because at this point, you're the one who needs help.

basilico:


With regards to Deutsche Bank and DC post office, you said he lied about his net worth to obtain the loan. So he had to disgorge his engorged profits. The bank that lent him was proud of their relationships. Two of their very senior employees testified unambiguously.
About DC hotel, why you said he lied and fraudulently obtained loan? Why you think we can't read what you wrote?. Why you think my opinion was built from one article only? I let it stand hoping you would edit your lies.
Either you know are lying, which I believe you do.
Or you are just a polite Obrigardo like 🦜 parrot.
I brought up Buzzfeed article because it is part of Anti Trump media. The others you mentioned NYT, Wapo, etc are just far left ragtag bunch of liars all working in conjunction. Obama spinmaster Ben Rhodes called those rags an echo chamber. He directed them how to report, what keywords to use while he served at the WH. You are an unwitting victim.Every single day he would circulate talking points to media. He said thus.
"Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing,”

I asked you for a single credible factual source.

Please, let's not pretend like you have any interest in the truth, because you clearly don't. You are the one repeating the same baseless accusations and ad hominem attacks that have been debunked by the court and the media. Judge Engoron ordered Trump to disgorge the profit he made from the sale of the Old Post Office in Washington, D.C., which he had converted into a hotel, because he had inflated its value by a humongous amount in his financial statements. I admit I probably should have clarified that the amount was not directly related to the amount of money he borrowed, but to the amount of money he gained from his fraud, but then again, that's still beyond the point here -- that Trump fraudulently inflated the values of his assets. As for Deutsche Bank, they sued Trump for defaulting on the loan and Trump countersued them and alleged that they caused the 2008 financial crisis. How is that a proud relationship?

The simple reason you brought up the Buzzfeed article is because you were actually hoping to distract me from the main issue. But your pathetic attempt backfired, because you failed to address the substance of the evidence that shows Trump's fraudulent behavior. Instead, you resorted to ad hominem attacks and conspiracy theories, accusing the media of being part of a coordinated effort to smear Trump and his cronies. Your attempt to cast doubt on the credibility of the sources I cited by calling them "far left ragtag bunch of liars" is dead on arrival, because those sources are some of the most respected and reputable news outlets in the world, with a long history of journalistic excellence and integrity. They have won numerous awards and accolades for their reporting, including Pulitzer Prizes, Peabody Awards, and National Magazine Awards, and they have also exposed countless cases of corruption, abuse of power, and human rights violations, both at home and abroad, often at great risk to their own safety and reputation. How very stupid of you to suggest they are propaganda websites because they dare to question the actions of your divine overlord Trump. Like I said, you have no regard for the truth or the facts, you just blindly follow the cult of personality that is Trump and his enablers.

Moving on to the latest gaffe in your series of misfortunes in this debate, you decided to quote Ben Rhodes admitting to wilfully deceiving the media, thinking that this somehow proves your point, but it actually does the opposite. Since you're pathologically dishonest, you decided to leave out the context in which he made his statement, and twist it to suit your foolish narrative. But don't worry, I've taken the liberty to highlight his full quote, as you'll see in the screenshot below from a New York Times article. I had to read that article from start to finish. Rhodes was talking about foreign policy, not general media strategy. He was not directing the media how to report on everything, but rather providing them with information and access to experts who could explain the rationale and benefits of the deal, making a persuasive case for a diplomatic solution to a complex and contentious problem. Furthermore, Rhodes was not the only one who supported the Iran deal. The deal was endorsed by many other countries, including the UK, France, Germany, Russia, and China, as well as the UN Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency. It was also backed by a majority of Americans, according to polls, and by many former and current officials, diplomats, and experts, from both parties, who saw it as the best option to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

His quote acknowledged the reality of the changing media landscape, where many outlets have reduced their foreign coverage and rely on Washington-based reporters who may not have the expertise or experience to cover complex global issues. When he says that they "literally know nothing", he is suggesting that they may not have the depth or breadth of knowledge that previous generations of reporters had, and so he and his team try to provide them with the resources and contacts they needed.

You must one of those people who think that the media is a monolithic entity that is controlled by a shadowy cabal of leftists, globalists, and deep staters, who are hell-bent on destroying Trump and America. How quaint, and utterly delusional. You have no clue how journalism works, how diverse and competitive the media landscape is, how many checks and balances there are to ensure accuracy and accountability, and how many brave and dedicated reporters there are who risk their lives and reputations to expose the truth, no matter who is in power. You have no clue how to evaluate sources, how to verify facts, how to distinguish between opinion and analysis, and how to think critically and independently.

You and I both know you are quickly running out of ammo in this debate, and that's why you're flinging shit desperately at the wall, and hoping it sticks. You know that your position on this thread will tumble down if you address the facts directly instead of deflecting with irrelevant talking points and frivolous criticisms. You're a fraud, and you don't want to admit it.

basilico:


You didn't accuse him if lying based on the evidence provided.
You have a mission to confuse us with your lies.
You demand impossible proof
or evidence when it comes to Fani. When it comes to Trump
She told two witnesses who also can't remember the year. You want to link that to trauma of a rape victim , hello affecting three people? After Lewinsky affair, I doubt anyone would fail to note dates and time and moreso the year.

You lied she had DNA proof. DNA can be planted Her backers and financiers are influential people including DOJ. What entity tested the DNA found on her dress by the way? FBI labs?

She had a photo as proof. Trump has a quadrillion photos taken with women.

Her purported rape mirrors a TV episode she watched. Did she purposely decide the venue of the rape as it was next to Trump's hotel?
Don't forget she was a fan of the Apprentice show.
I stand unconvinced , I disregard everything you write as a purposeful attempt to hoodwink.You will not drag me down into the holes you are dug in.

Look at you flailing about, spouting irrelevant rubbish. Like I said, you're losing yourself in this argument. You have no more ammo. Carroll's lawyers have sought Trump's DNA for three years to compare it with stains found on the dress Carroll wore the day she says Trump raped her in a department store dressing room. Analysis of DNA on the dress concluded it did contain traces of an unknown man's DNA. Trump refused to provide a DNA sample until a federal judge ordered him to do so in 2020. What was Trump running from for three freaking years? I'd like to know, please. And how can you claim that DNA can be planted and that Carroll's backers and financiers are influential people, including the Department of Justice? Who are these mysterious backers and financiers? How did they plant DNA on Carroll's dress without her knowing? Why would the DOJ, which was under Trump's control for most of his presidency, be involved in a plot to frame him? You are making wild accusations without any proof, just like Trump himself. As for the photo, I've already told you that the one Carroll has is not proof of rape. It is proof that Trump knew her, contrary to his claim that he never met her.

I see you brought back the reality show conspiracy theory again. You really have no tangible objections to the case ruling, do you? LOL.

JessicaRabbit:


You seem to be stuck on repeat, like a broken record player skipping the "constructive criticism" track. Maybe it's time you invested in a new comeback and a self-awareness upgrade, because at this point, you're the one who needs help.

Sick people with insurance should make use of it. You are so sick you thought insurance for opinions exist.

Seek the help you need. You are really sick.

bemeruca:


Sick people with insurance should make use of it. You are so sick you thought insurance for opinions exist.

Seek the help you need. You are really sick.

Oh dear, did my sarcasm give you an allergic reaction? Maybe you do need help after all, with deciphering humor. Tsk tsk.

budaatum:




Flynn's case was not determined in court and bears no relationship to Fanni Willis, whom if guilty should be punished.

Point is, I do condemn Democrats when I disapprove of what they do, unlike you who's head is so up dump's ass you stinks of his poo and even new arrivals smell you are a waste of time.

I only criticise what I think is unjust targeting which happens to be the only thing driving the left.
I have said he ain't a saint, he uses F words liberally and posted a video of him using f bombing.Ive called her m a womanizer also.
Some of those new ones are not new, it's some disgraced sheep in new skins.

JessicaRabbit:


Please, let's not pretend like you have any interest in the truth, because you clearly don't. You are the one repeating the same baseless accusations and ad hominem attacks that have been debunked by the court and the media. Judge Engoron ordered Trump to disgorge the profit he made from the sale of the Old Post Office in Washington, D.C., which he had converted into a hotel, because he had inflated its value by a humongous amount in his financial statements. I admit I probably should have clarified that the amount was not directly related to the amount of money he borrowed, but to the amount of money he gained from his fraud, but then again, that's still beyond the point here -- that Trump fraudulently inflated the values of his assets. As for Deutsche Bank, they sued Trump for defaulting on the loan and Trump countersued them and alleged that they caused the 2008 financial crisis. How is that a proud relationship?

The simple reason you brought up the Buzzfeed article is because you were actually hoping to distract me from the main issue. But your pathetic attempt backfired, because you failed to address the substance of the evidence that shows Trump's fraudulent behavior. Instead, you resorted to ad hominem attacks and conspiracy theories, accusing the media of being part of a coordinated effort to smear Trump and his cronies. Your attempt to cast doubt on the credibility of the sources I cited by calling them "far left ragtag bunch of liars" is dead on arrival, because those sources are some of the most respected and reputable news outlets in the world, with a long history of journalistic excellence and integrity. They have won numerous awards and accolades for their reporting, including Pulitzer Prizes, Peabody Awards, and National Magazine Awards, and they have also exposed countless cases of corruption, abuse of power, and human rights violations, both at home and abroad, often at great risk to their own safety and reputation. How very stupid of you to suggest they are propaganda websites because they dare to question the actions of your divine overlord Trump. Like I said, you have no regard for the truth or the facts, you just blindly follow the cult of personality that is Trump and his enablers.

Moving on to the latest gaffe in your series of misfortunes in this debate, you decided to quote Ben Rhodes admitting to wilfully deceiving the media, thinking that this somehow proves your point, but it actually does the opposite. Since you're pathologically dishonest, you decided to leave out the context in which he made his statement, and twist it to suit your foolish narrative. But don't worry, I've taken the liberty to highlight his full quote, as you'll see in the screenshot below from a New York Times article. I had to read that article from start to finish. Rhodes was talking about foreign policy, not general media strategy. He was not directing the media how to report on everything, but rather providing them with information and access to experts who could explain the rationale and benefits of the deal, making a persuasive case for a diplomatic solution to a complex and contentious problem. Furthermore, Rhodes was not the only one who supported the Iran deal. The deal was endorsed by many other countries, including the UK, France, Germany, Russia, and China, as well as the UN Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency. It was also backed by a majority of Americans, according to polls, and by many former and current officials, diplomats, and experts, from both parties, who saw it as the best option to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

His quote acknowledged the reality of the changing media landscape, where many outlets have reduced their foreign coverage and rely on Washington-based reporters who may not have the expertise or experience to cover complex global issues. When he says that they "literally know nothing", he is suggesting that they may not have the depth or breadth of knowledge that previous generations of reporters had, and so he and his team try to provide them with the resources and contacts they needed.

You must one of those people who think that the media is a monolithic entity that is controlled by a shadowy cabal of leftists, globalists, and deep staters, who are hell-bent on destroying Trump and America. How quaint, and utterly delusional. You have no clue how journalism works, how diverse and competitive the media landscape is, how many checks and balances there are to ensure accuracy and accountability, and how many brave and dedicated reporters there are who risk their lives and reputations to expose the truth, no matter who is in power. You have no clue how to evaluate sources, how to verify facts, how to distinguish between opinion and analysis, and how to think critically and independently.

You and I both know you are quickly running out of ammo in this debate, and that's why you're flinging shit desperately at the wall, and hoping it sticks. You know that your position on this thread will tumble down if you address the facts directly instead of deflecting with irrelevant talking points and frivolous criticisms. You're a fraud, and you don't want to admit it.

I thought you are new here.

basilico:


I only criticise what I think is unjust targeting ......

Your so called "think" is unjust, if I must, and your "targeting" always misses it's mark.

J

JessicaRabbit:


Look at you flailing about, spouting irrelevant rubbish. Like I said, you're losing yourself in this argument. You have no more ammo. Carroll's lawyers have sought Trump's DNA for three years to compare it with stains found on the dress Carroll wore the day she says Trump raped her in a department store dressing room. Analysis of DNA on the dress concluded it did contain traces of an unknown man's DNA. Trump refused to provide a DNA sample until a federal judge ordered him to do so in 2020. What was Trump running from for three freaking years? I'd like to know, please. And how can you claim that DNA can be planted and that Carroll's backers and financiers are influential people, including the Department of Justice? Who are these mysterious backers and financiers? How did they plant DNA on Carroll's dress without her knowing? Why would the DOJ, which was under Trump's control for most of his presidency, be involved in a plot to frame him? You are making wild accusations without any proof, just like Trump himself. As for the photo, I've already told you that the one Carroll has is not proof of rape. It is proof that Trump knew her, contrary to his claim that he never met her.

I see you brought back the reality show conspiracy theory again. You really have no tangible objections to the case ruling, do you? LOL.

Do you think fani Willis is under some blackmail from Biden WH? Her deputy looks too qualified to be operating at county level.
Fani was also obese at one tine. Do your u think her weight lioss clouds her judgement?

budaatum:


Flynn's case was not determined in court and bears no relationship to Fanni Willis, whom if guilty should be punished.

Point is, I do condemn Democrats when I disapprove of what they do, unlike you who's head is so up dump's ass you stinks of his poo and even new arrivals smell you are a waste of time.

Where is the evidence of this?

bemeruca:


Where is the evidence of this?

Fact you are ignored is the evidence.

budaatum:


Your so called "think" is unjust, if I must me, and your "targeting" always misses it's mark.

I don't care. This serves as my bookmark site.

basilico:


Do you think fani Willis is under some blackmail from Biden WH? Her deputy looks too qualified to be operating at county level.
Fani was also obese at one tine. Do your u think her weight lioss clouds her judgement?

Take a second look at the post you quoted and read your response again. Are you losing it? What does this reply have to do with what I posted? You just can't help yourself, can you? Honest question, and with no offense, but I'm genuinely curious: do you suffer from A.D.H.D?

basilico:


I thought you are new here.

Have you seen me elsewhere suggesting otherwise?

What does this have to do with topic?

LOL.

budaatum:


Fact you are ignored is the evidence.

Show us one time you criticize Biden

@mentalcase98 your boy is now dahighlife 🤣🤣🤣

He said he dedicated his life to debunk conspiracy theories on this thread 🤣

bemeruca:
@mentalcase98 your boy is now dahighlife 🤣🤣🤣

He said he dedicated his life to debunk conspiracy theories on this thread 🤣

😂😂😂😂😂😂😅

#DaGayLife