Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:300k is nothing. I do believe his injuries and all the fracas is worth it. He’ll get at best 60% of that if his lawyers are working on contingency. He may get taxed.
If she wins he’s ruined and his children won’t inherit either. I think it’s a tragedy in which a rich person shows just how easily steered our judicial system is when money is mismatched.
Something many of our neighbors have known for far too long
She won already and he sued her, she had to defend herself and only requested $1 to make the point. If he's ruined, he can only blame himself.
Her legal fees would bankrupt him
So she shouldn't have lawyers defend her in this bad faith case?? He can quickly go bankrupt and might get away with not paying her legal fees.
Hope you eyeroll when you face bankruptcy at 76. What this tells everyone is that the new class system is here to stay and rebellion is futile
Look, it's obvious when he came off the trail telling everyone he was famous that he saw this as his golden parachute. This trail was his planned retirement and apparently he's been working hard at that investment since 2016. It failed, McDonald's is hiring.
And that’s why Americans have a lowering life expectancy and die alone in crappy nursing homes. No sense of empathy, solidarity, thought
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Regardless of the outcome, her derisive, mocking facial expressions were obnoxious.
Will add that I think she showed her true self.
How should one look while being sued in a frivolous lawsuit?
Did you see the faces she was making? OBNOXIOUS
Don’t care. What matters is not allowing con men to lie and shake people down. Weird you have nothing to say about this grifter. Says a lot about you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Regardless of the outcome, her derisive, mocking facial expressions were obnoxious.
Will add that I think she showed her true self.
How should one look while being sued in a frivolous lawsuit?
Did you see the faces she was making? OBNOXIOUS
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Regardless of the outcome, her derisive, mocking facial expressions were obnoxious.
I would have laughed at him too. What an idiot.
Well, then I can see why you like her. You're two of a kind.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:300k is nothing. I do believe his injuries and all the fracas is worth it. He’ll get at best 60% of that if his lawyers are working on contingency. He may get taxed.
If she wins he’s ruined and his children won’t inherit either. I think it’s a tragedy in which a rich person shows just how easily steered our judicial system is when money is mismatched.
Something many of our neighbors have known for far too long
She won already and he sued her, she had to defend herself and only requested $1 to make the point. If he's ruined, he can only blame himself.
Her legal fees would bankrupt him
So she shouldn't have lawyers defend her in this bad faith case?? He can quickly go bankrupt and might get away with not paying her legal fees.
Hope you eyeroll when you face bankruptcy at 76. What this tells everyone is that the new class system is here to stay and rebellion is futile
Look, it's obvious when he came off the trail telling everyone he was famous that he saw this as his golden parachute. This trail was his planned retirement and apparently he's been working hard at that investment since 2016. It failed, McDonald's is hiring.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Regardless of the outcome, her derisive, mocking facial expressions were obnoxious.
I would have laughed at him too. What an idiot.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:300k is nothing. I do believe his injuries and all the fracas is worth it. He’ll get at best 60% of that if his lawyers are working on contingency. He may get taxed.
If she wins he’s ruined and his children won’t inherit either. I think it’s a tragedy in which a rich person shows just how easily steered our judicial system is when money is mismatched.
Something many of our neighbors have known for far too long
She won already and he sued her, she had to defend herself and only requested $1 to make the point. If he's ruined, he can only blame himself.
Her legal fees would bankrupt him
So she shouldn't have lawyers defend her in this bad faith case?? He can quickly go bankrupt and might get away with not paying her legal fees.
Hope you eyeroll when you face bankruptcy at 76. What this tells everyone is that the new class system is here to stay and rebellion is futile
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:300k is nothing. I do believe his injuries and all the fracas is worth it. He’ll get at best 60% of that if his lawyers are working on contingency. He may get taxed.
If she wins he’s ruined and his children won’t inherit either. I think it’s a tragedy in which a rich person shows just how easily steered our judicial system is when money is mismatched.
Something many of our neighbors have known for far too long
She won already and he sued her, she had to defend herself and only requested $1 to make the point. If he's ruined, he can only blame himself.
Her legal fees would bankrupt him
So she shouldn't have lawyers defend her in this bad faith case?? He can quickly go bankrupt and might get away with not paying her legal fees.
Hope you eyeroll when you face bankruptcy at 76. What this tells everyone is that the new class system is here to stay and rebellion is futile
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:300k is nothing. I do believe his injuries and all the fracas is worth it. He’ll get at best 60% of that if his lawyers are working on contingency. He may get taxed.
If she wins he’s ruined and his children won’t inherit either. I think it’s a tragedy in which a rich person shows just how easily steered our judicial system is when money is mismatched.
Something many of our neighbors have known for far too long
She won already and he sued her, she had to defend herself and only requested $1 to make the point. If he's ruined, he can only blame himself.
Her legal fees would bankrupt him
So she shouldn't have lawyers defend her in this bad faith case?? He can quickly go bankrupt and might get away with not paying her legal fees.
He didn’t have to sue. He’s been traveling around the world and has expensive hobbies. He will be fine.
Hope you eyeroll when you face bankruptcy at 76. What this tells everyone is that the new class system is here to stay and rebellion is futile
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Where does your desire to please the celebrity come from?
Weird question
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:300k is nothing. I do believe his injuries and all the fracas is worth it. He’ll get at best 60% of that if his lawyers are working on contingency. He may get taxed.
If she wins he’s ruined and his children won’t inherit either. I think it’s a tragedy in which a rich person shows just how easily steered our judicial system is when money is mismatched.
Something many of our neighbors have known for far too long
She won already and he sued her, she had to defend herself and only requested $1 to make the point. If he's ruined, he can only blame himself.
Her legal fees would bankrupt him
So she shouldn't have lawyers defend her in this bad faith case?? He can quickly go bankrupt and might get away with not paying her legal fees.
Anonymous wrote:Where does your desire to please the celebrity come from?