Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 051

him*** criticizes attorney Geyer for claiming the court should appreciate his effort to consolidate over 6,500 individuals to reduce judicial burden.

him*** contends that Geyer is simply claiming funds on behalf of 6,500 people for his own convenience.

rod*** disputes the claim of 6,500 individuals, alleging that the figure was fabricated.

him*** contends that fraud prosecutions do not legally require victims.

him*** argues that the prosecution previously stated a conviction could be obtained without establishing victims.

rui*** asserts that financial claims are secondary and contends that their Motion 733 alleging judicial fraud is the principal avenue.

hah*** shares an analytical post evaluating Motion 733 and Rule 60.

rui*** disputes the shared analysis, contending that its first point is entirely false.

rui*** further rejects the analysis, arguing that its second point is also incorrect.

reb*** suggests that Document 679 may need to be printed and mailed together because the court might not check past filings on its own.

pz0*** claims that the Second Circuit refused to hear the appeal, asserting that their prediction was validated.

rui*** disputes pz0***'s claim, contending that the prediction was not correct.

wei*** urges rui*** to claim in court that Geyer infringed on victim rights and committed fraud on the court, advising a demand for compensation from him.

wei*** advises citing specific document numbers and relevant contents to provide solid evidence.

wei*** contends that seeking financial recovery directly in court is the only proper solution.

him*** cites Documents 344, 382, and 388 to argue that farm leaders are recognized co-conspirators whose registration agreements should be invalidated rather than used for claims.

an7*** mocks the argument, contending that the speaker is reacting out of panic over the case being dismissed.

rui*** sarcastically challenges an7*** to persuade the prosecution to dismiss the case.

ntp*** questions the utility of the ongoing analysis, arguing that time would be better spent drafting actual motions.

ntp*** contends that effort is being misdirected and wasted on ineffective methods.

ntp*** criticizes the workflow for overcomplicating simple matters contrary to the purpose of artificial intelligence.

hon*** shares an external link regarding the case proceedings.

rui*** states that the matter will conclude once the prosecution files its motion.

him*** asks whether the forfeiture proceedings have officially ended.

chu*** asks why trustee Luc Despins has not formally intervened in the case to claim the thirty-two billion dollars.

chu*** presses pz0*** to explain why Despins was active in criminal court yet has not moved to claim funds.

chu*** calls on opponents of Guo to clarify why Despins is not intervening to seize assets.

an7*** argues that proving prosecutorial fraud is virtually impossible and contends that dismissal will instead stem from dismantling the victim narrative.

rui*** states that they spared Geyer because he initially cited Motion 733.

rui*** contends that prosecutorial fraud on the court has already been established.