← Back to context Comment by dgellow 10 hours ago [flagged] 3 comments dgellow Reply Petersipoi 10 hours ago Just to make sure I'm understanding, you're saying that Google payed someone (presumably Trump), who then went and convinced a Clinton appointed judge who has ruled against Trump in the past to give the case to Google?Is that actually what you think? dgellow 10 hours ago I do not no, I don’t have an opinion on the Google situation. I was responding to the following:> Make enough money and pay off enough politicians, and you can pretty much shoot people on the street in broad daylight.
Petersipoi 10 hours ago Just to make sure I'm understanding, you're saying that Google payed someone (presumably Trump), who then went and convinced a Clinton appointed judge who has ruled against Trump in the past to give the case to Google?Is that actually what you think? dgellow 10 hours ago I do not no, I don’t have an opinion on the Google situation. I was responding to the following:> Make enough money and pay off enough politicians, and you can pretty much shoot people on the street in broad daylight.
dgellow 10 hours ago I do not no, I don’t have an opinion on the Google situation. I was responding to the following:> Make enough money and pay off enough politicians, and you can pretty much shoot people on the street in broad daylight.
Just to make sure I'm understanding, you're saying that Google payed someone (presumably Trump), who then went and convinced a Clinton appointed judge who has ruled against Trump in the past to give the case to Google?
Is that actually what you think?
I do not no, I don’t have an opinion on the Google situation. I was responding to the following:
> Make enough money and pay off enough politicians, and you can pretty much shoot people on the street in broad daylight.