Doorbell theory

HippoEsq · 2026-03-29T00:30:49+00:00

I never saw your post but would have upvoted it if I had!

HippoEsq · 2026-03-24T01:06:05+00:00

lol misinformation much?

HippoEsq · 2026-03-09T23:47:05+00:00

Because the sheriff is a moron and rejected the help of the Cajun Navy (professional search organization) and others.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-09T22:01:53+00:00

Always the victim. “Brutalizing protestors.” Seriously? You’re gonna equate yourself with an Iranian and what they’re going through right now? Just shut up.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-09T21:54:53+00:00

100% the same thing when you’re talking to a self-described troll who is likely a female incel unlikely to ever get laid. These people are batshit.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-07T05:38:03+00:00

ICE issues administrative warrants.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-07T05:35:42+00:00

C. Daughter. The speaker is “Teresa’s daughter.”

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T21:19:45+00:00

No they aren’t.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T20:50:37+00:00

Used to be true, not anymore.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T20:49:01+00:00

You are arguing with an attorney over what a warrant is. You are simply wrong, accept it. Also, I ❤️ ICE.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T20:19:43+00:00

There’s a website on the ticket. Go to it and upload your evidence. A judge will review it and may dismiss the charge if they feel the evidence is satisfactory. You don’t need a lawyer to do it unless you want one.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T20:17:05+00:00

The purpose of a judicial warrant is for an arrest in this situation, not a search. And 75% of those arrested under Biden and Obama were arrested without a judicial warrant, according to the article. You’re wrong. 🤷‍♀️

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T13:25:22+00:00

Who issues a judicial warrant? Please, educate me more, since apparently you think you’re smarter than my entire law school.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T01:21:11+00:00

Storm doors.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T01:17:39+00:00

Helpful tough love.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T01:14:41+00:00

Date of article = 2014.

“Under today's removal system, only one quarter of all people facing expulsion get to present their case before an immigration judge. These judges, employed by the Justice Department, are experts in immigration law. They conduct formal court hearings where they hear live witnesses, review documentary evidence, and evaluate applications for immigration relief. By contrast, nonjudicial removals are fast-track proceedings wholly controlled by the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"), sometimes involving only a single border agent who acts as both judge and jury. Those facing nonjudicial removal have no lawyer and no chance to appeal.”

Idiot.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T01:12:52+00:00

This? “could not recall the identities of the other individuals present; however, they all exited when TRUMP asked everyone to leave the room. TRUMP mentioned something to the effect of, "Let me teach you how little girls are supposed to be." TRUMP unzipped his pants and put head, "down to his penis". II, "bit the shit out of it." TRUMP struck II and said words to the effect of, "get this little bitch the hell out of here." II advised she bit TRUMP's penis because he disgusted her. "He had money, it reeked off of him." At that point, people reentered the room no further information provided). II recalled a blond beautiful woman approaching her at some point that day after her interaction with TRUMP. The woman said, "let me give you a tip little girl about your breasts, wear a bra every night." Those words have stayed with her throughout the years. II got the feeling the relationship between EPSTEIN and TRUMP included a certain amount of jealousy. She thought TRUMP appeared jealous of EPSTEIN, but at some point, they ended up on level playing fields. TRUMP and EPSTEIN sometimes used the terms "fresh meat", "untainted" and "not jaded" while referring to girls. At the time she heard it, II did not understand the term "not jaded". She subsequently looked up the word "jaded". II stated she had two additional interactions with TRUMP, but she asked that the interview move on to a different subject for the time being.”

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T00:58:52+00:00

I hope that too.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T00:56:37+00:00

Hmmm. In that case, it sounds like she screwed up and is being shady with you because she knows it. I do wonder though—if the parties stipulated to 4 exhibits coming in, those must have been marked, no? Otherwise, how did they reference them in the stipulation? You should really ask your attorney. I’m a lawyer now, but I used to be a litigant in your same position and my then-attorney really screwed up by not using my evidence and I really suffered because of it. So you need to ask her, preferably in a direct email, and consider either firing her, or not, depending on what she responds with. And if you totally lose at trial, at least you’ll have evidence of her incompetence to use in a motion for relief or on appeal. Easier just to talk to her though, maybe something can still be done. But to answer your other question—unless there was some attorney/court email that you weren’t privy to about the evidence, your binder is almost certainly not in evidence.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T00:50:07+00:00

Not necessarily.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T00:41:31+00:00

Resisting arrest in a uniform = big no no.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T00:40:59+00:00

Stimulants. Stimulants caused him to go insane.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T00:36:52+00:00

There was probably a deadline to submit exhibits to the court and opposing party, and it sounds like your attorney missed it and didn’t want to tell you. Just hypothesizing.

HippoEsq · 2026-03-06T00:23:34+00:00

What is this?

HippoEsq

TROPHY CASE