Jump to content
The Education Forum

Cory Santos

Members
  • Content count

    184
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Cory Santos

  • Rank
    Experienced Member
  • Birthday 04/01/1976

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    Uh oh Cliff, look what I found on the internet today while reading. On CNN no less!!!! https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/19/opinions/democrats-need-reform-new-york-primary-weaver/index.html
  2. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    Interesting points. I understand what you say about King, Tyson, etc. However, there are other names, but, really, no matter who I throw out it seems people disagree with. Stacey Dash, there, ok I said it. Actually, I think Trump outdid Romney in so many ways in how he presented his campaign. Really though, I could be more elaborate and go on and on, as some apparently here do (not you Kirk), but, in a limited medium as this, I view this not for a learned legal opinion, but, for a common discussion with language that one would expect over lunch.
  3. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    Will you admit Hillary lied over and over and the voters noticed it? Can you admit that or not?
  4. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    I know about Don Kings background very well. It seems I am not getting through here. Let me put it this way, if you think Trump did not appeal to some African Americans-way more than Romney or McCain did-well, its your opinion, no matter how wrong it is. Trump reached out to voters that Republicans had not sought for a long time and he went to places Republicans had not gone to in a long time. This is observation, not support or glorification of him.
  5. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    Interesting, I know a great deal of people in Michigan who voted Obama who voted for Trump and I think its fair to say I have a good understanding of the politics and culture in Michigan. You have to understand what Michigan has gone through economically. Naw, instead call it voter suppression. Prove it was voter suppression. but it was you say. Why? Because people ineligible to vote were not allowed to vote? Ugh, the nerve of the law. No, Trump appealed to people who had been forgotten, left behind, without hope. He gave them hope that things could get better, that jobs were not just for attorneys, doctors, accountants, but for everyone. Again, let me be clear, I know democrats who voted for Trump. They did not want to admit it but did. The FBI issue and Hillary lying again, and again, and again, that did not help. Amazing, no one wants to admit that. The voters were not stupid. As a trial lawyer, the worst thing that can happen is your client can get caught in a lie - which is why you tell them never to lie. The best thing is when I catch the other side in a lie. Once you lie, no one trusts you. In the courtroom it means everything. Hillary lied and lied and lied, and people noticed. That is what helped Trump. So say Trump did not win, Hillary just lost it. Fine. Keep feeling bad about the election, look for answers, I know what happened. I recall I was involved heavily in the 2008 and 2012 elections in Nevada. Obama won easily here. Why? Was it voter fraud? No. Why do Republicans refer to everything as voter fraud and Democrats refer to it as voter suppression? Regardless of the votes, the loser cries about this. GET OVER IT! President Trump won because he reached out to voters. How many times did Hillary go to Michigan compared to Trump? Look it up. You will have your answer. "His lies were rarely countered" That was funny, I guess MSNBC, CNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, the View, etc. don't count? Every day they punched at him over anything he said. Sorry, you don't like him. You got him till 2020. Now did JFK steal the election? Umm... another story. And if anything I said offended you, not meant to.
  6. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    Cliff, calling people names like that, well, its your opinion. They called JFK things too I guess. BTW, did you know Don King, Mike Tyson, and many other African Americans supported Trump? Steve, I have seen pics of Obama and Putin, big deal. Obama gave money to Iran, but that is ok with you apparently. Clinton allowed N. Korea to go nuclear. Ok. All ok. Just hate Trump. Imagine if JFK had sent someone to talk to Castro, that horrible dictator or had plans to have détente with Cuba and Russia. Ugh, intervention time right?
  7. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    Well if talking with the so called enemy is a bad thing and opening a channel of communication is bad, Trump is guilty. I can say he is not a politician. His moves are so unconventional that people in Washington on both sides are feeling anxious. The idea that a president is actually acting like a president and not a puppet is something new in D.C. The last president to do so, well, we know what happened.
  8. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    LOL, Cliff, cmon.
  9. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    No. There are reasons. If I was his counsel, I would have told him to go to the meeting. For several reasons which I will not go into on a public forum. However, I would add politically it made sense. One thing about Trump, he always seems to be two steps ahead of his competition. That is why he did so well in NY- I know others would cite other reasons. I would say this too, and the pundits on CNN don't get this or are intentionally ignoring this point, the public sees so little about what is going on behind the scenes. There could be so many intelligence and policy reasons to have had this meeting. But those reasons are classified. How would the public dealt with knowing about Operation Mongoose? It had to be kept secret at the time.
  10. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    I have to politely disagree with you. I think he did what was appropriate in meeting with Putin.
  11. Cory Santos

    Dallas Conference

    First when I discuss the evidence on both shootings, but mainly JFK, I start out with the idea that you cannot look at it as a traditional case. Usually a case has evidence and you go from there. Here, the actual evidence was immediately altered, destroyed, or hidden. Witnesses were harassed, etc. So much of the evidence was actually classified. So there is little direct evidence. But, the direct evidence of the conspiracy is this treatment of the evidence. It is the proof of conspiracy. It would be hard to argue in court alone on the evidence that it was a conspiracy because of that. Though, I think if Garrison had the evidence we have know, he might have obtained a conviction. Moreover, I think the circumstantial evidence that is out there is becoming overwhelming to show it was a conspiracy. I always find it strange how the media fails to note that Congress found it was "probably" due to a conspiracy. Instead they rely on the W.C. result. Second, the RFK autopsy is evidence. Is it proof of a conspiracy? Well, clearly the trajectory shows the bullet entered from behind. So the problem is did RFK duck and/or turn around? The fact that it shows the distance was minimal, yes, I believe that point shows proof that the bullet came from a distance that was closer than Sirhan's position. But then you have to look at the other evidence. Again, we have problems with the evidence being properly preserved. Now, as for the dictabelt, this is so simple. It should have been done decades ago. You get the three top experts in the world, have them independently analyze it and publish their findings scientifically so that others can evaluate it. But you never get that. Why? Because it is like the dental records issue, I had an expert look at it. He provided me his opinion. When I explained what it was about, he wanted nothing to do with it. Why? Because there is some stigma about the assassination. I know, I have dealt with it several times. Luckily in law school a very well known professor supported me on the issue and encouraged me to write about it. I usually do not bring it up in polite conversation at parties. So, when experts write about it, even if you disagree, understand that they are putting their reputation at risk immediately by discussing this. Perhaps. . . RFK realized this and went along until he could become president. But then why did he not have proper protection? UGH... But, alas, there were other plans. So you ask what would make Congress act? Amazingly, I think only a Kennedy family member making a big enough stink. That is the only thing other than another movie like JFK inspiring the public. RFK Jr. is making the case, but not loudly enough. A huge write in petition might do it but look at the online petitions, they never even get near enough signatures for this. Perhaps if the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU, and several other organizations together made this a huge national effort, something might get done. But, the ACLU? Do they care? Would any organization really make this a fight? Probably not. The evidence and books written are good but to Congress do they want to act on that? No. Watch the movie Wild Things, there is a subtle put down of JFK research in one particular scene. The wrongly accused teacher yells at the DA to tell the investigating detective to go investigate the JFK Assassination. The implication was clear and a simple way to tell the audience research on this subject is a joke. So it is up to the Kennedy family. But, Caroline has shown zero interest.
  12. https://www.newnationalist.net/2018/07/14/newly-released-jfk-files-reveal-us-military-intercepted-coded-messages-about-assassination-plot/
  13. Cory Santos

    Alternative Assassins (names)

    Lots of talk this week about the intercepted messages by two separate people. One noted William Harvey, Jean Soutre and Guy Bannister. https://www.newnationalist.net/2018/07/14/newly-released-jfk-files-reveal-us-military-intercepted-coded-messages-about-assassination-plot/ See also, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1992/11/22/all-the-presidents-triggermen/09606b79-77a0-4b2c-8e23-206de3fb1513/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fc85ca00acc9
  14. Cory Santos

    I agree with Trump

    I agree. Some people were saying today that he should have really confronted Putin. 1) How do they know what happened behind closed doors? 2) We should jump into war? CNN commentary aside, I think if Clinton won we would be at war already. To think of war with Russia-Soviet states is very scary. Can't imagine how terrible it was during JFK's presidency. Had LBJ or Nixon won? I don't know what would have happened. But considering the records are still not being released, it makes one wonder what is happening in the U.S. within his own administration.
×