ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
Possibly they didn't but the risk was much higher than was represented.
Do we want to give to a pass to those selling fraudulantly high risk as long as it goes ok?
I'm guessing lozen thinks it's okay for an employee to borrow a couple of hundo from petty cash when they're short on personal cash, so long as they pay it back or intend to pay it back.
The bias is in prosecuting him to the full extent of the law and not all democratic donors living in NY state who always did the same. And sentencing to the max possible fine amount you think appeal courts won't overtun.
That's fine, it's legal.
Just, accept all republican states doing it as much as possible forever now, and you are never allowed to complain if they explicitly disregard republican irregularities and only target democrats and
I accept that Trump is a scumbag and that once he is disposed of, things will not continue as is. As pointed out by another poster, Trump had as many scumbag lawsuits when he was a registered Democrat before he was a politician.
Fair enough.
Is it truly your belief that there are lots of other people living in NY state that have been as deceptive and fraudulent as Donald Trump, and not prosecuted for it?
I'm not going to tell you that they prosecute everyone, because we know that's not true. And I'm not going to tell you that there couldn't have been political motivation behind Trump's prosecution, because of course there could have been, and it's not something easil
It's truly my belief that most people who deal in commercial real estate (and other illiquid, hard to assess assets where loans are crucial for success) do everything they can to inflate the value of the collateral they post for loans yes, not only in NY.
If republicans start doing the same ofc they can't complain anymore. Republicans don't complain anymore when Biden puts judges in with 50 votes + the vicepresident.
Lol no? at least if a state goes crazy you move (like Musk moved away from delaware).
If the feds go crazy you suffer and have no options.
Are you informed about the IRS targeting right wing associations on purpose?
IRS settled in court admitting responsibility for arbitrary targeting of rightwing groups
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1...
/The IRS admitted it was wrong when it based screenings of the groups' applications on their na
House Republican investigators found no connection to the Obama administration, according to a 2014 report.
I accept that Trump is a scumbag and that once he is disposed of, things will not continue as is.
The filibuster was diminished before Trump appeared on the scene , and won't be back anytime soon. It's actually close to be nuked completly, we are just one trifecta way for either party for that to happen.
What kept the nation from complete polarization is eroding fast. And even with Trump gone, things won't heal.
Sure the IRS is independent (lol).
Who was fined , destroyed, his life ruined, because of those egregious violations of the law AND of the essence of government?
dont break the law i guess? idk. i've managed to never be convicted of fraud or tax evasion in my life. must just be #blessed. what happened to the conservative values of if you didnt do something wrong you have nothing to worry about?
if the house republicans who were super motivated could find zero to connect it to the Obama administration it's safe to say there was nothing.
most of my career and life is dedicated to keeping the little guy from getting run over by the government, which is what someone like you should ACTUALLY care about.. not bootlicking rich fraudsters and conmen.
Lol no, "loanable funds" are unlimited, if it's a secured loan it doesn't change capital tier ratios, they can borrow at lower rates and lend to you at higher rates, jfc we are in fractional reserve systems with unlimited liquidity available if you have assets to post as collateral, we aren't in 1850
Ah, so it's kind of important those assets are listed accurately, eh?
it's funny how right wing/conservative/libertarianism always ends up at "we should let these rich white guys do fraud and cheat everyone out of money and get away with it" but not "hey we shouldn't as a society have cash bail because it's government hostage and ransom denying people freedom before they are convicted." i wonder why that is.
it's funny how right wing/conservative/libertarianism always ends up at "we should let these rich white guys do fraud and cheat everyone out of money and get away with it" but not "hey we shouldn't as a society have cash bail because it's government hostage and ransom denying people freedom before they are convicted." i wonder why that is.
If there is fraud there is a victim. The victim sues for relief.
In Trump case the bank testified in his favor, do you understand this?
I don't understand the bail part, i actually think that until convincted unless taken in flagrancy you should be free (at most with a gps monitoring device).
I'm guessing lozen thinks it's okay for an employee to borrow a couple of hundo from petty cash when they're short on personal cash, so long as they pay it back or intend to pay it back.
Think of it as selling a percentage of your action at better odds than you should get, because you convince people you are a better player than you actually are (including by lying about your past results).
They don't do due diligence so don't check objectively how good you are. They don't ask for your database, they don't ask for a pokerstars audit or anything like that, they just decide to believe you, and they do this (buying action) AS THEIR FULL TIME JOB and have 100k employees.
Then you win, so they make a profit.
Would you be liable in court, if they don't sue?
Just hope republicans never get power in any place where they can hurt democrats. Because they will use it to the full extent of the law and they will write laws to achieve that, if given a chance, and they will be completly morally legitimated doing so by this.
Missed this the first time. No, that's not how morality works.
If what the Democrats are doing now is truly immoral, the appropriate response isn't for Republicans to do the same when they come into power. This a great example of the wonderful :rollseyes: ways in which Trump and modern Republicanism has shifted the Overton window. Political leadership isn' t meant to be about getting revenge for how you feel you were wronged by the other side in the past. I know it might seem that way when we're treated to day after day of Trump spouting off about how he will be a "dictator for a day" and wreak vengeance on those who dared to work against him, but that's not the way a properly functioning government operates.
So if your man Trump wins the election and decides that he needs to take a bunch of immoral actions because the Democrats did, don't waste your breath telling me that makes his actions moral. It doesn't, and we should demand better.
It's truly my belief that most people who deal in commercial real estate (and other illiquid, hard to assess assets where loans are crucial for success) do everything they can to inflate the value of the collateral they post for loans yes, not only in NY.
That's not what I asked, and I even said that they don't prosecute everyone. I asked if you believe "there are lots of other people living in NY state that have been as deceptive and fraudulent as Donald Trump, and not prosecuted for it".
If republicans start doing the same ofc they can't complain anymore. Republicans don't complain anymore when Biden puts judges in with 50 votes + the vicepresident.
No, that's not what I'm asking. I'm saying that them/you complaining now about what's happened to Trump, and then "doing the same" to the Democrats but saying they can't complain about it like they/you just did endlessly, sounds a little hypocritical, so I was wondering if your "rules" handled that or not. I don't really care, it's a silly conversation anyway. :p
Did chez and luciom both short circuit? One is saying stealing petty cash is not theft, and the other one chimes in to say it's markup?
Think of it as selling a percentage of your action at better odds than you should get, because you convince people you are a better player than you actually are (including by lying about your past results).
They don't do due diligence so don't check objectively how good you are. They don't ask for your database, they don't ask for a pokerstars audit or anything like that, they just decide to believe you, and they do this (buying action) AS T
This is the crux of it imo
Puffery might be ok legally even if it's scummy. Legal documents is a different matter - that's where it's really important to have legal consequences.
Missed this the first time. No, that's not how morality works.
If what the Democrats are doing now is truly immoral, the appropriate response isn't for Republicans to do the same when they come into power. This a great example of the wonderful :rollseyes: ways in which Trump and modern Republicanism has shifted the Overton window. Political leadership isn' t meant to be about getting revenge for how you feel you were wronged by the other si
I am not a christian and i don't have judaico-christian morality. Total revenge following severe aggression for me is one of the most moral actions possible, i am more "nordic"/pagan pre-christian in that (blood feuds, honor systems et al).
In libertarian terms, when you severely violate the NAP against me, everything is moral if done to damage you, it's actually imperative to act to damage you as much as possible until you are permanentely neutralized (until it is impossible for you to ever violate the NAP against me in the future), and as a deterrent for third parties to not violate the NAP against me and my allies.
There are no actual moral limits when you open the floodgate, not in my moral model.
So in the UK an employee can take money out of the drawer without documenting it, blow it at the race track, and it's not theft?
Does that work at the bar, too?
In uk law, theft requires the intent to permenantly deprive.
It's a masterpiece of a law imo
Theft is defined by section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 as the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive the other of it.
The bias is in prosecuting him to the full extent of the law and not all democratic donors living in NY state who always did the same. And sentencing to the max possible fine amount you think appeal courts won't overtun.
That's fine, it's legal.
Just, accept all republican states doing it as much as possible forever now, and you are never allowed to complain if they explicitly disregard republican irregularities and only target democrats and
A yes, the current MAGA threat of the week. Right on cue.
Speaking of attempts to overthrow an election.
Is this a violation of 18 USC 2383?
This appears to implicate the Obama Administration in actually spying on Trump's campaign and incoming Administration officials. Is this not a conspiracy to overthrow the incoming government/ overturn an election? If, in fact, this was aimed at destroying or otherwise tampering with the lawful and peaceful selection of the civilian government then there is a ve
Spying isn't good, but I have no idea how you think it would be trying to overturn an election. If I peek into your house to look at you, does that mean I'm necessarily planning to steal the house from you?
I am not a christian and i don't have judaico-christian morality. Total revenge following severe aggression for me is one of the most moral actions possible, i am more "nordic"/pagan pre-christian in that (blood feuds, honor systems et al).
In libertarian terms, when you severely violate the NAP against me, everything is moral if done to damage you, it's actually imperative to act to damage you as much as possible until you are permanentely
As an atheist, I also have no religious basis for my morals, but all I can say to this is that I'm glad you're not in a position of power where I live. And hopefully not there either, because I love visiting Italy.
I am not a christian and i don't have judaico-christian morality. Total revenge following severe aggression for me is one of the most moral actions possible, i am more "nordic"/pagan pre-christian in that (blood feuds, honor systems et al).
In libertarian terms, when you severely violate the NAP against me, everything is moral if done to damage you, it's actually imperative to act to damage you as much as possible until you are permanentely
Dunno man, seems pretty biblical to me. This you?
confucious say 'dig two graves'
chez says 'dig three'
