Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 050

zha*** contends that Judge Torres is frantically searching for justifications.

rui*** maintains that the procedural situation represents a deadlock.

yyy*** refers to court docket entry 755.

wen*** recounts that an attorney declined representation warning that even with counsel the filing would be intercepted, and notes asking via email what made it unsuitable.

him*** asks about the status of the luxury car company.

him*** questions why that submission was not intercepted.

wei*** argues that individuals qualify as interested persons rather than parties, suggesting Rule of Law Foundation donations could establish standing because assets were allegedly purchased with foundation funds.

wei*** emphasizes that these two terms carry distinct legal meanings in court and urges others to research them.

hon*** disputes another participant's motives, contending they only appeared to reap benefits once the court docket updated.

rui*** states that filing 762 concerns Bradford Geyer representing thousands of victims.

rui*** describes the motion's objective as excluding those investments from the forfeiture proceedings.

sar*** asks what the attorney is attempting to accomplish with the filing.

zha*** contends that nobody would pay attention to Bradford Geyer without the Alliance and Sara.

zha*** argues that Geyer serves as a spokesperson for the Alliance farms rather than representing investors.

rui*** argues that Geyer cited documents 733 and 744 to portray third parties as divided, boost his own authority, and establish a preemptive defense, which inadvertently corroborates independent investor standing.

rui*** contends that Bradford Geyer's motion effectively aligns with their position so long as they do not accuse him of conspiracy.

rui*** observes that Geyer unexpectedly helped counter filing 742.

rui*** notes that they had deliberately avoided criticizing Geyer and did not mention him in their own submission.

rui*** shares an external link regarding litigation strategies.

yyy*** argues that legal claims involving Section 853, Rule 60(d)(3), and fraud upon the court are free from time limitations.

rui*** disputes this claim, questioning whether Rule 60 applies under Section 853.

hah*** posts an attachment without text displaying an AI analysis of the legal motion.

hah*** shares an additional non-text attachment containing AI analysis results.

rui*** asks why their own informal analysis reached the exact same conclusion.

hah*** posts an attachment without text concerning third-party pro se filings.

ntp*** questions the motives behind continuously promoting and increasing target numbers from 5,000 to 10,000.

wei*** contends that court proceedings require shifting the burden of proof and criticizes others for making unevidenced allegations of false representation against Bradford Geyer.

ntp*** argues that overturning the case would inevitably bring recognition without needing extraordinary efforts.

him*** disputes Bradford Geyer's assertion that the Alliance farms did not coordinate promotional efforts, calling it completely false.

ntp*** contends that defending the Alliance confirms that Geyer maintains improper ties with them.

chu*** shares an external link discussing court developments.

him*** summarizes Bradford Geyer's Oct 22, 2025 filing in Doc. 761, explaining that Geyer refuted RICO conspiracy claims from ECF 742 by arguing a standard visit to MDC Brooklyn does not prove ongoing crime.

rui*** suggests probing whether Geyer implies that Zhang Yongbing never actually visited the detention center.