Team Trump v/s Everyone

[UNI88]

Republicans have had 2 1/2 years to think about this and plan it out. I've posted before, Comer & Jordan are Republican versions of Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The Bidens aren't stonewalling the investigations anymore than trump is stonewalling his investigations/indictments.

I literally posted "I think both Bidens are as dirty as can be" but I'm in denial? Not thinking they're going to find anything that will actually stick in court doesn't mean I don't think they're guilty.

It took the donks almost 2 years control of the House before Trumps 1st impeachment. Conks have only had control of the House for 8 months.

So a Biden impeachment at this time would be as valid as trump’s first impeachment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

The Republicans just took over the house like 9 months ago, and if they didn’t The Rotten one would have been home free. They are stonewalling these investigations at every turn. Not sure why your in denial about Biden’s crimes and there was a reason he called Hunter the smartest guy he knows, he used his scumbag son to do all the dirty work… some father huh

Republicans have had 2 1/2 years to think about this and plan it out. I've posted before, Comer & Jordan are Republican versions of Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The Bidens aren't stonewalling the investigations anymore than trump is stonewalling his investigations/indictments.

I literally posted "I think both Bidens are as dirty as can be" but I'm in denial? Not thinking they're going to find anything that will actually stick in court doesn't mean I don't think they're guilty.

What are both Biden’s guilty of?

[UNI88]

Republicans have had 2 1/2 years to think about this and plan it out. I've posted before, Comer & Jordan are Republican versions of Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

The Bidens aren't stonewalling the investigations anymore than trump is stonewalling his investigations/indictments.

I literally posted "I think both Bidens are as dirty as can be" but I'm in denial? Not thinking they're going to find anything that will actually stick in court doesn't mean I don't think they're guilty.

What are both Biden’s guilty of?

There might not be enough evidence to stand up in court but there is enough for me to believe that Hunter peddled access to Joe for money and that Joe got a cut. Those that can’t see it are just as fanatical and/or partisan as those that believe trump is innocent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

What are both Biden’s guilty of?

There might not be enough evidence to stand up in court but there is enough for me to believe that Hunter peddled access to Joe for money and that Joe got a cut. Those that can’t see it are just as fanatical and/or partisan as those that believe trump is innocent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree Hunter traded on his name. What do you believe indicates Joe got a cut. (Serious question)

[UNI88]

There might not be enough evidence to stand up in court but there is enough for me to believe that Hunter peddled access to Joe for money and that Joe got a cut. Those that can’t see it are just as fanatical and/or partisan as those that believe trump is innocent.

I agree Hunter traded on his name. What do you believe indicates Joe got a cut. (Serious question)

The "big guy" comment plus getting on the phone with Hunter's "clients". If Joe didn't know what was going on he's too stupid to be President. I don't think he was that stupid so I think he knew and was in on it.

[kalm]

I agree Hunter traded on his name. What do you believe indicates Joe got a cut. (Serious question)

The "big guy" comment plus getting on the phone with Hunter's "clients". If Joe didn't know what was going on he's too stupid to be President. I don't think he was that stupid so I think he knew and was in on it.

The big guy comment came from Hunter. Hunters business partner testified Joe was never a part of any deal making.

He’d talk about the weather. Wait a minute…maybe “weather” was code for corrupt payments. Hmmmmm.

[UNI88]

The "big guy" comment plus getting on the phone with Hunter's "clients". If Joe didn't know what was going on he's too stupid to be President. I don't think he was that stupid so I think he knew and was in on it.

The big guy comment came from Hunter. Hunters business partner testified Joe was never a part of any deal making.

He’d talk about the weather. Wait a minute…maybe “weather” was code for corrupt payments. Hmmmmm.

I trust Hunter's business partners about as much as I trust Kushner's business partners.

There is enough there for me to believe Joe's dirty but I don't think they're going to get anyone to flip and tell the truth under oath.

[UNI88]

donald Hoover trump ...

[kalm]

donald Hoover trump ...

But where are the Trumpvilles?

[houndawg]

What are both Biden’s guilty of?

There might not be enough evidence to stand up in court but there is enough for me to believe that Hunter peddled access to Joe for money and that Joe got a cut. Those that can’t see it are just as fanatical and/or partisan as those that believe trump is innocent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When do we get to the part where they show their evidence?

[houndawg]

The big guy comment came from Hunter. Hunters business partner testified Joe was never a part of any deal making.

He’d talk about the weather. Wait a minute…maybe “weather” was code for corrupt payments. Hmmmmm.

I trust Hunter's business partners about as much as I trust Kushner's business partners.

There is enough there for me to believe Joe's dirty but I don't think they're going to get anyone to flip and tell the truth under oath.

You don't flip on MBS.

[UNI88]

Claire McCaskill Floats Trump Legal Punishment That Hits Him Where It 'Hurts'

“There’s a sense that this judge needs to be very clear about what happens if he violates the gag order,” she told MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace on “Deadline: White House” on Tuesday.

Her idea? “If he violates the gag order, every time he violates it, she should move the trial up one week,” McCaskill said.
...
Timothy Heaphy, who was the Jan. 6 committee’s lead investigator, said he totally agreed with the former senator, but the judge “may not go as far as Claire suggests.”

“But I expect her to say, ‘Sir, your statements are making it very difficult for us and really the only way to cure that is to get this matter resolved,’” he added.

[houndawg]

What are both Biden’s guilty of?

There might not be enough evidence to stand up in court but there is enough for me to believe that Hunter peddled access to Joe for money and that Joe got a cut. Those that can’t see it are just as fanatical and/or partisan as those that believe trump is innocent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of course he did, that shit is SOP at that level. But you still gotta prove it. Otherwise Jared Kushner wouidn't be walking around as a free man and the Donald would be eligible for parole

[kalm]

Trump found liable for financial fraud.

So 91 counts of various crimes involving election interference and national security, liable for sexual assault, liable for massive financial fraud.

Trump: windmills are making whales weird and Jeb Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanistan!

The Republican Party: preach it brother!

[GannonFan]

Trump found liable for financial fraud.

So 91 counts of various crimes involving ejection interference and national security, liable for sexual assault, liable for massive financial fraud.

Trump: windmills are making whales weird and Jeb Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanistan!

The Republican Party: preach it brother!

I still don't understand this particular case. I certainly believe Trump inflated his worth, I didn't think that was even in dispute. But who was harmed in this case? The banks and insurance companies he gave these records to get coverage and loans? Don't banks and insurance companies independently verify sources of income? Especially for sums as large as these? Heck, I can't refinance my home without an appraiser giving an appraisal, and the last time I did that the guy walked through my whole house, opened every cabinet, and basically spent an hour going through everything. And I don't own anything other than a simple colonial house with a finished basement. I don't even own a golf course, or several. So surely these companies knew the veracity, or lack of it, in these documents. But at the end of the day, it's up to them to decide if they're going to do business with Trump or not. Does anyone believe they made these decisions based on the shoddy documents he gave them? And interestingly, they aren't the plaintiffs in this case. So the people supposedly "duped" by Trump's mastermind plan of inflating his worth aren't even complaining. So again, why does this particular case even exist?

If there's an issue with a tax burden, that I can understand, but by overinflating his worth didn't he increase his tax burden?

[houndawg]

Trump found liable for financial fraud.

So 91 counts of various crimes involving ejection interference and national security, liable for sexual assault, liable for massive financial fraud.

Trump: windmills are making whales weird and Jeb Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanistan!

The Republican Party: preach it brother!

I still don't understand this particular case. I certainly believe Trump inflated his worth, I didn't think that was even in dispute. But who was harmed in this case? The banks and insurance companies he gave these records to get coverage and loans? Don't banks and insurance companies independently verify sources of income? Especially for sums as large as these? Heck, I can't refinance my home without an appraiser giving an appraisal, and the last time I did that the guy walked through my whole house, opened every cabinet, and basically spent an hour going through everything. And I don't own anything other than a simple colonial house with a finished basement. I don't even own a golf course, or several. So surely these companies knew the veracity, or lack of it, in these documents. But at the end of the day, it's up to them to decide if they're going to do business with Trump or not. Does anyone believe they made these decisions based on the shoddy documents he gave them? And interestingly, they aren't the plaintiffs in this case. So the people supposedly "duped" by Trump's mastermind plan of inflating his worth aren't even complaining. So again, why does this particular case even exist?

If there's an issue with a tax burden, that I can understand, but by overinflating his worth didn't he increase his tax burden?

No because the tax man gets different numbers than the bankers get, of course you know that - its funny to watch you carry his water while trying to appear the impartial observer. He lied on his paperwork in order to defraud the banker and then again at tax time to defraud the gubmint.

[kalm]

Trump found liable for financial fraud.

So 91 counts of various crimes involving ejection interference and national security, liable for sexual assault, liable for massive financial fraud.

Trump: windmills are making whales weird and Jeb Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanistan!

The Republican Party: preach it brother!

I still don't understand this particular case. I certainly believe Trump inflated his worth, I didn't think that was even in dispute. But who was harmed in this case? The banks and insurance companies he gave these records to get coverage and loans? Don't banks and insurance companies independently verify sources of income? Especially for sums as large as these? Heck, I can't refinance my home without an appraiser giving an appraisal, and the last time I did that the guy walked through my whole house, opened every cabinet, and basically spent an hour going through everything. And I don't own anything other than a simple colonial house with a finished basement. I don't even own a golf course, or several. So surely these companies knew the veracity, or lack of it, in these documents. But at the end of the day, it's up to them to decide if they're going to do business with Trump or not. Does anyone believe they made these decisions based on the shoddy documents he gave them? And interestingly, they aren't the plaintiffs in this case. So the people supposedly "duped" by Trump's mastermind plan of inflating his worth aren't even complaining. So again, why does this particular case even exist?

If there's an issue with a tax burden, that I can understand, but by overinflating his worth didn't he increase his tax burden?

There are different banking rules and hoops to jump through for the average person. It’s similar to IRS shaking down the little guy or cops busting a street kid selling bags of weed. Easier to enforce rules and prosecute the less powerful.

There’s a reason NY has these laws. I’m guessing they aren’t the only state.

[GannonFan]

I still don't understand this particular case. I certainly believe Trump inflated his worth, I didn't think that was even in dispute. But who was harmed in this case? The banks and insurance companies he gave these records to get coverage and loans? Don't banks and insurance companies independently verify sources of income? Especially for sums as large as these? Heck, I can't refinance my home without an appraiser giving an appraisal, and the last time I did that the guy walked through my whole house, opened every cabinet, and basically spent an hour going through everything. And I don't own anything other than a simple colonial house with a finished basement. I don't even own a golf course, or several. So surely these companies knew the veracity, or lack of it, in these documents. But at the end of the day, it's up to them to decide if they're going to do business with Trump or not. Does anyone believe they made these decisions based on the shoddy documents he gave them? And interestingly, they aren't the plaintiffs in this case. So the people supposedly "duped" by Trump's mastermind plan of inflating his worth aren't even complaining. So again, why does this particular case even exist?

If there's an issue with a tax burden, that I can understand, but by overinflating his worth didn't he increase his tax burden?

No because the tax man gets different numbers than the bankers get, of course you know that - its funny to watch you carry his water while trying to appear the impartial observer. He lied on his paperwork in order to defraud the banker and then again at tax time to defraud the gubmint.

Please, don't be silly. I've never put his name on a ballot in my life, and won't. And I'll be thrilled when he's gone off into the sunset.

But like I said, who was harmed here? Bankers who knew he was inflating his numbers? If you really think the bankers were duped then I really question your own interpretation of anything.

[GannonFan]

I still don't understand this particular case. I certainly believe Trump inflated his worth, I didn't think that was even in dispute. But who was harmed in this case? The banks and insurance companies he gave these records to get coverage and loans? Don't banks and insurance companies independently verify sources of income? Especially for sums as large as these? Heck, I can't refinance my home without an appraiser giving an appraisal, and the last time I did that the guy walked through my whole house, opened every cabinet, and basically spent an hour going through everything. And I don't own anything other than a simple colonial house with a finished basement. I don't even own a golf course, or several. So surely these companies knew the veracity, or lack of it, in these documents. But at the end of the day, it's up to them to decide if they're going to do business with Trump or not. Does anyone believe they made these decisions based on the shoddy documents he gave them? And interestingly, they aren't the plaintiffs in this case. So the people supposedly "duped" by Trump's mastermind plan of inflating his worth aren't even complaining. So again, why does this particular case even exist?

If there's an issue with a tax burden, that I can understand, but by overinflating his worth didn't he increase his tax burden?

There are different banking rules and hoops to jump through for the average person. It’s similar to IRS shaking down the little guy or cops busting a street kid selling bags of weed. Easier to enforce rules and prosecute the less powerful.

There’s a reason NY has these laws. I’m guessing they aren’t the only state.

Eh, in the end it's private businesses deciding to do business and take on risks with another private business and or individual. If the banks want to throw money down the drain to give him money when they know the information he's giving them is wrong I don't see the danger to the public. And there are always reasons for every law on the books - just doesn't mean they're good reasons. I've seen the people writing the laws, I think it's okay to think a little critically as to whether the laws are any good.

As for the analogies, the other one I would add is the NCAA one - you know, the NCAA was so pissed off at the recruiting violations at Alabama that they threw the book at Prairie View A&M (or some other hapless SWAC HBCU program).

[Skjellyfetti]

making "errors" in the self checkout lane should be legal (oopsie! i thought these new york strips were bananas. sorry i am an inept cashier, but i didn't receive any training and you aren't paying me). the grocery store wants to outsource checkout duties to shoppers. they can decide if it is worth the savings in cashier pay to take some losses.

^^ this is obviously sarcasm. and, yes - the public is hurt when people do this because the costs are passed onto customers. but, that is also true with insurance and bank fraud.

The total cost of insurance fraud (non-health insurance) is estimated to be more than $40 billion per year. That means Insurance Fraud costs the average U.S. family between $400 and $700 per year in the form of increased premiums.

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publ ... ance-fraud

[kalm]

making "errors" in the self checkout lane should be legal (oopsie! i thought these new york strips were bananas. sorry i am an inept cashier, but i didn't receive any training and you aren't paying me). the grocery store wants to outsource checkout duties to shoppers. they can decide if it is worth the savings in cashier pay to take some losses.

^^ this is obviously sarcasm. and, yes - the public is hurt when people do this because the costs are passed onto customers. but, that is also true with insurance and bank fraud.

The total cost of insurance fraud (non-health insurance) is estimated to be more than $40 billion per year. That means Insurance Fraud costs the average U.S. family between $400 and $700 per year in the form of increased premiums.

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publ ... ance-fraud

This. ^

[GannonFan]

making "errors" in the self checkout lane should be legal (oopsie! i thought these new york strips were bananas. sorry i am an inept cashier, but i didn't receive any training and you aren't paying me). the grocery store wants to outsource checkout duties to shoppers. they can decide if it is worth the savings in cashier pay to take some losses.

^^ this is obviously sarcasm. and, yes - the public is hurt when people do this because the costs are passed onto customers. but, that is also true with insurance and bank fraud.


https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publ ... ance-fraud

This. ^

I get that, but it's not the same. The banks knew very well that Trump's documents were fraudulent. And they still lent to him anyway. They weren't duped, they did so willingly. It's why they aren't suing him over this.

[bobbythekidd]

Trump found liable for financial fraud.

So 91 counts of various crimes involving ejection interference and national security, liable for sexual assault, liable for massive financial fraud.

Trump: windmills are making whales weird and Jeb Bush got us into Iraq and Afghanistan!

The Republican Party: preach it brother!

I still don't understand this particular case. I certainly believe Trump inflated his worth, I didn't think that was even in dispute. But who was harmed in this case? The banks and insurance companies he gave these records to get coverage and loans? Don't banks and insurance companies independently verify sources of income? Especially for sums as large as these? Heck, I can't refinance my home without an appraiser giving an appraisal, and the last time I did that the guy walked through my whole house, opened every cabinet, and basically spent an hour going through everything. And I don't own anything other than a simple colonial house with a finished basement. I don't even own a golf course, or several. So surely these companies knew the veracity, or lack of it, in these documents. But at the end of the day, it's up to them to decide if they're going to do business with Trump or not. Does anyone believe they made these decisions based on the shoddy documents he gave them? And interestingly, they aren't the plaintiffs in this case. So the people supposedly "duped" by Trump's mastermind plan of inflating his worth aren't even complaining. So again, why does this particular case even exist?

If there's an issue with a tax burden, that I can understand, but by overinflating his worth didn't he increase his tax burden?

The bank and insurance companies were harmed. The bank gave better rates than they needed to. Insurance gave lower rates thinking the property wasn't worth what it was.

[houndawg]

No because the tax man gets different numbers than the bankers get, of course you know that - its funny to watch you carry his water while trying to appear the impartial observer. He lied on his paperwork in order to defraud the banker and then again at tax time to defraud the gubmint.

Please, don't be silly. I've never put his name on a ballot in my life, and won't. And I'll be thrilled when he's gone off into the sunset.

But like I said, who was harmed here? Bankers who knew he was inflating his numbers? If you really think the bankers were duped then I really question your own interpretation of anything.

Red Herring - with a side order of Straw Man sprinkled with Ad Hominem dust.

A common theme in your apologia: its not a crime if nobody got hurt

[UNI88]

I still don't understand this particular case. I certainly believe Trump inflated his worth, I didn't think that was even in dispute. But who was harmed in this case? The banks and insurance companies he gave these records to get coverage and loans? Don't banks and insurance companies independently verify sources of income? Especially for sums as large as these? Heck, I can't refinance my home without an appraiser giving an appraisal, and the last time I did that the guy walked through my whole house, opened every cabinet, and basically spent an hour going through everything. And I don't own anything other than a simple colonial house with a finished basement. I don't even own a golf course, or several. So surely these companies knew the veracity, or lack of it, in these documents. But at the end of the day, it's up to them to decide if they're going to do business with Trump or not. Does anyone believe they made these decisions based on the shoddy documents he gave them? And interestingly, they aren't the plaintiffs in this case. So the people supposedly "duped" by Trump's mastermind plan of inflating his worth aren't even complaining. So again, why does this particular case even exist?

If there's an issue with a tax burden, that I can understand, but by overinflating his worth didn't he increase his tax burden?

The bank and insurance companies were harmed. The bank gave better rates than they needed to. Insurance gave lower rates thinking the property wasn't worth what it was.

Then the banks and insurance companies had standing in court? Did the New York state government?

Did trump undervalue assets for tax purposes while overvaluing them for borrowing purposes?