Bet he doesn't win many cases.
Judge would have dropped off listening to his long winded statements.
I repeat I do not believe he is a lawyer, or resides in the US.
How can he be up until the early hours all the time, unless of course he is unemployed, which he more than likely
Judges decide legal motions mainly, juries handle the trying of facts. Motions are decided on the papers, oral arguments are essentially worthless. Judges make up their mind before oral arguments and don't change them as a result.
I'm a real lawyer I have no reason to make it up. Facts are established by evidence to support such not the occupation of the person making the claim.
I especially have no reason to make up being in the US. How does that help it's not as if everyone here loves America.
I am awake into the early hours of the morning but rarely post those hours because I am normally watching TV and people here are asleep or just waking up. Sometimes I am doing things at the computer and will be here when people are posting early but that is usually weekends.
The post I made at 4pm your time was 11am my time. You currently are 5 hours ahead after Halloween it will jump to 6 hours ahead. 11am is when I got around to coming to this site that day. That makes it doubtful I am in the US?
Where am I Mongolia? Germany? Australia? Maybe you think I am in the UK and using American English to fool people, though why would I need to? This site is anonymous I don't need to say I am in a different country to keep my identity hidden. What purpose would be served by it?
When you go that far off the deep-end into conspiracy theories that you think I am lying about what country I am from it undermines your entire line of reasoning and thought process. You should quit while you are ahead saying you don't believe I am a lawyer to which I respond who cares. I don't care if people believe it or not I said it because if people ask about my background I have no problem answering. It doesn't mean squat whether people believe it or not such has nothing to do with the arguments I make and evidence I present.
Where I am from and what occupation I do won't change that the US left Vietnam after a peace deal was signed, that Nixon secretly promised to defend the RVN in the event the treaty is broken, that Nixon failed to live up to his promise, allowed the North Vietnamese invasion to to occur unmolested and as Saigon was falling evacuated thousands of Vietnamese to the Philippines but many more were left behind to face the wrath of the communists. These are historical facts. My background doesn't have anything to do with them. I know these historical facts because of my background- I am an American who took courses on the Cold War and Vietnam in college. One of my professors was from the "Revisionist School" but he didn't force his views on us he explained the revisionist views and traditional views. The particular revisionist arguments he subscribed to was that the US wanted to save South Vietnam from communist rule so that after the war was over they could open South Vietnam to Japanese trade so that Japan would sell to South Vietnam and that since such efforts failed Japan ended up selling to us instead creating the huge trade imbalances that followed the Vietnam War. He could not point to anyone in the government who said they were trying to set up Vietnam to become a market for Japanese goods. He could not point to anyone in the government who said they needed to open other markets anywhere in order to prevent a trade imbalance from blowing out of control with Japan. It's something these revisionists simply thought up themselves that they think deep down in secret this was the concerns. I was exposed to all sorts of schools of thought but at the end of the day I only believe what can be established with proof.
So I don't give a rat's ass that in his memoirs Dwight Eisenhower claimed the Chinese agreed to a cease fire in Korea because he threatened to use the atomic bomb and this scared them into capitulating. I look at evidence. The evidence is that the US didn't threaten China. Obscure remarks were passed to China through intermediaries that all options were on the table. That's a far cry from threatening to nuke them if they don't quit. Chinese sources reveal the government was not concerned about atomic bombs. They were prepared to endure massive loss of life like they had endured at the hands of the Japanese. That is the thing about totalitarian governments they don't care about protecting their citizens they care about their politics only.
If the US actually nuked their main industrial areas that could have caught their attention and made them realize they totally underestimated the threat but it's a damn lie to say that they were in fear of being nuked and this is why they agreed to a cease fire. Just because that was Eisenhower's opinion doesn't make it reality. I care about reality not self-serving erroneous opinions.
