Hey, don't be so dismissive! He might be a lolyer. Or an eekinomics expert.
I explicitly said I'm NOT a lolyer. Do you even read?
Despite not being a lolyer EVEN I know that you are allowed to claim your house is worth whatever you want. And it's up to OTHER ACTORS IN THE MARKETPLACE not the Government to decide whether your claim is accurate or not. That's called the Free Market. I'm not endorsing the system I'm just explaining to you how it works.
Tucker Carlson: "Virtually nothing the liberal says is true. And the lies aren't ordinary lies, the lies are so brazen, so aggressive, and unending that it's difficult for a normal person to understand what's happening."
"Fox persuasively argues . . . that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer arrives with an appropriate amount of skepticism about the statements he makes." - Judge Vyskocil
If I knew a LOT more context of the trial, I might have more "respect" for this statement. But at face value, it kind of annoys me, because it gives the average Fox viewer WAY too much credit. And in so doing, becomes damn close to bogus.
The average moron in that audience was NOT sitting in their dated family room saying, "Yeah, I know that Tucker is exaggerating or lying, but I find him entertaining."
No, they were eating it up, believing it to be real. They should have known better, but didn't. Fox did know better, and kept doing it.
If Trumpers were capable of "an appropriate amount of skepticism," we wouldn't have Trump.
Hey, don't be so dismissive! He might be a lolyer. Or an eekinomics expert.
I explicitly said I'm NOT a lolyer. Do you even read?
Despite not being a lolyer EVEN I know that you are allowed to claim your house is worth whatever you want. And it's up to OTHER ACTORS IN THE MARKETPLACE not the Government to decide whether your claim is accurate or not. That's called the Free Market. I'm not endorsing the system I'm just explaining to you how it works.
I'm not a teacher or loyler or an eekinomics expert, but it WOULD be interesting to go find some syllabi for economics courses and see how many have "Lie as much as you want" as one of the fundamental principles of free markets? I'm thinkin' that might be hard to find.
Oh, and your loyler modesty notwithstanding, you're apparently claiming that you DO know far more about fraud than the judge, correct? (he IS a loyler)
Oh, and a free tip: Worry a lot more about verifying your thoughts/beliefs rather than identifying what kind of expert you are not.
I explicitly said I'm NOT a lolyer. Do you even read?
Despite not being a lolyer EVEN I know that you are allowed to claim your house is worth whatever you want. And it's up to OTHER ACTORS IN THE MARKETPLACE not the Government to decide whether your claim is accurate or not. That's called the Free Market. I'm not endorsing the system I'm just explaining to you how it works.
I'm not a teacher or loyler or an eekinomics expert, but it WOULD be interesting to go find some syllabi for economics courses and see how many have "Lie as much as you want" as one of the fundamental principles of free markets? I'm thinkin' that might be hard to find.
Oh, and your loyler modesty notwithstanding, you're apparently claiming that you DO know far more about fraud than the judge, correct? (he IS a loyler)
Oh, and a free tip: Worry a lot more about verifying your thoughts/beliefs rather than identifying what kind of expert you are not.
So, it works like this. Let's say you put your house up for sale for $400k. Let's say I examine it and notice the pipes need work and the floorboards are creaky so I only think it's worth $300k. Do I go sue you for fraud? No, I just pass up on buying the house and we both carry on with our lives. You don't need to be a lolyer or economics expert to understand this, sometimes you just have to apply a little common sense.
Wikipedia is an amazing resource for learning the nuts and bolts of something. Anything. Here’s a summary of the charges. I suspect Deutsche bank would disagree with the notion that this is a victimless fraud.
At a September 21, 2022, press conference, James announced a lawsuit against Trump, his three oldest children, and the organization for fraud and other forms of misrepresentation, citing over 200 alleged instances and asserting that Trump "wildly exaggerated his net worth by billions of dollars".[125][126] James cited New York Executive Law § 63(12) as lending her "broad and special powers".[38] The suit asserts that between 2011 and 2021 Trump and the organization made over 200 "false and misleading valuations of assets on his annual Statements of Financial Condition to defraud financial institutions"[127] and, amongst other charges, that he used low valuations to avoid paying between $85 and $150 million in interest charges on loans from Deutsche Bank.[128] The suit seeks about $250 million in damages, the instatement of a five-year ban on the company conducting real-estate transactions in the state and a permanent bar against Trump and his three oldest children from officiating or directing any business or corporation there. Additionally, James cited evidence of potential criminal insurance and bank fraud,[129] for which she referred the case to federal criminal prosecutors in Manhattan and the IRS.[125][130]
I'm not a teacher or loyler or an eekinomics expert, but it WOULD be interesting to go find some syllabi for economics courses and see how many have "Lie as much as you want" as one of the fundamental principles of free markets? I'm thinkin' that might be hard to find.
Oh, and your loyler modesty notwithstanding, you're apparently claiming that you DO know far more about fraud than the judge, correct? (he IS a loyler)
Oh, and a free tip: Worry a lot more about verifying your thoughts/beliefs rather than identifying what kind of expert you are not.
So, it works like this. Let's say you put your house up for sale for $400k. Let's say I examine it and notice the pipes need work and the floorboards are creaky so I only think it's worth $300k. Do I go sue you for fraud? No, I just pass up on buying the house and we both carry on with our lives. You don't need to be a lolyer or economics expert to understand this, sometimes you just have to apply a little common sense.
If you asked for a loan using your assets as collateral and wildly inflated the value of your assets to get a lower rate in your loan, that is fraudulent. that’s what trump did.
I'm not a teacher or loyler or an eekinomics expert, but it WOULD be interesting to go find some syllabi for economics courses and see how many have "Lie as much as you want" as one of the fundamental principles of free markets? I'm thinkin' that might be hard to find.
Oh, and your loyler modesty notwithstanding, you're apparently claiming that you DO know far more about fraud than the judge, correct? (he IS a loyler)
Oh, and a free tip: Worry a lot more about verifying your thoughts/beliefs rather than identifying what kind of expert you are not.
So, it works like this. Let's say you put your house up for sale for $400k. Let's say I examine it and notice the pipes need work and the floorboards are creaky so I only think it's worth $300k. Do I go sue you for fraud? No, I just pass up on buying the house and we both carry on with our lives. You don't need to be a lolyer or economics expert to understand this, sometimes you just have to apply a little common sense.
Well, Trump may not be broke, yet, so reach out to him and see if you can get on his legal team. I don't know how trials like this work (or trials, period), but hopefully there will still be an opportunity for your to make EXACTLY the argument above to the judge. And then I guess he'll say, "Holy crap, you're right, I was wrong, this ISN'T fraud !! Never mind!!
Give it a try. Well, maybe run it by El Runkin, first. Good luck.
So, it works like this. Let's say you put your house up for sale for $400k. Let's say I examine it and notice the pipes need work and the floorboards are creaky so I only think it's worth $300k. Do I go sue you for fraud? No, I just pass up on buying the house and we both carry on with our lives. You don't need to be a lolyer or economics expert to understand this, sometimes you just have to apply a little common sense.
If you asked for a loan using your assets as collateral and wildly inflated the value of your assets to get a lower rate in your loan, that is fraudulent. that’s what trump did.
No, no, no. The thing you've got to remember is that banks and insurers do their own risk assessments. Therefore it is not a crime to commit a crime.
If you asked for a loan using your assets as collateral and wildly inflated the value of your assets to get a lower rate in your loan, that is fraudulent. that’s what trump did.
No, no, no. The thing you've got to remember is that banks and insurers do their own risk assessments. Therefore it is not a crime to commit a crime.
Hooma - are you serious? Committng a crime is not a crime? LOL>
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Monday introduced the resolution to remove Kevin McCarthy from his job as House speaker after weeks of threatening to do so.
Despite not being a lolyer EVEN I know that you are allowed to claim your house is worth whatever you want. And it's up to OTHER ACTORS IN THE MARKETPLACE not the Government to decide whether your claim is accurate or not.
The government, when it's assessing property taxes, would beg to differ with your account of how the system works.
Despite not being a lolyer EVEN I know that you are allowed to claim your house is worth whatever you want. And it's up to OTHER ACTORS IN THE MARKETPLACE not the Government to decide whether your claim is accurate or not.
The government, when it's assessing property taxes, would beg to differ with your account of how the system works.
This wasn't a dispute over property taxes. So that's irrelevant. Dumb comment.
If you asked for a loan using your assets as collateral and wildly inflated the value of your assets to get a lower rate in your loan, that is fraudulent. that’s what trump did.
No, no, no. The thing you've got to remember is that banks and insurers do their own risk assessments. Therefore it is not a crime to commit a crime.
I mean that's true, that's why it's not a crime.
If I claim the faucet works but it's actually leaky, that could be fraud. That's a factually incorrect statement.
But if I claim my house is worth 400 thousand and you disagree, that's a matter of opinion. You don't get to pay 400 grand anyway and then later claim you were defrauded. That's on you. Can't believe I have to explain this to ppl
Judge Engoron has issued a gag order in the Trump civil fraud trial after Trump posted about the judge's clerk. Engoron: "Consider this statement a gag order forbidding all parties from posting emailing or speaking publicly about any of my staff."