If you haven't been reading this board for very long, you will soon find out you're dealing with lying idiot conservatives. And then they demand you "debate" their lying stupidity.
Trump gets a $350 million fine. Arrested multiple times. Faces umpteen dozen years in jail. Not one Epstein client or participant arrested.
- Thread starter i am herdman
- Start date
Further proving the bias on Trump, dumbass.
FFS....Damn, you're stupid, dumbass.
You can't be serious with that moronic question.
You not seeing the clear and dangerous bias, toward Trump, by the weaponized DOJ, shocks no one. You're just a bleater.
If it can be proven she should go to jail.No charges filed...
UPDATED: Investigation into Jane Sanders over Burlington land deal concluded without charges in 2018, spokesperson said
FBI is probing whether Jane Sanders improperly acquired bank loans to expand Burlington College, which was forced to close because of heavy debtwww.cbsnews.com
"federal agents' allegations from a January 2016 complaint accusing then-President of Burlington College, Ms. Sanders, of distorting donor levels in a 2010 loan application for $10 million from People's United Bank to purchase 33 acres of land for the institution."
Hmmm... Sounds like fraud to me...
What say you @Raoul Duke MU ?
You aren't trying to argue Trump is not guilty by reason of whataboutism are you?
You stupid lying trumptard, if you shoot at someone with the intent to kill and they were unharmed and were never even aware of it, was there a victim?
That wasn't your original question, dumbass.
You asked if there was a victim in attempted murder.
Your dumbass spins it now into some sooo stupid, that calling you a dumbass is actually a compliment.
If no one knows about an attempted, but unsuccessful crime, of course there's no victim.
Now. You want to know how big of a dumbass you are?
Everyone knows about the crime Trump is accused of. EVERYONE.
Who is/are the victim(s)?
Now. What if no one knew anything?
Damn, you're a dumbass.
If he had something so important then they would have went and got it earlier. Second, if it were so compartmentalized it would have been a much different type of raid and he would be in prison now..third, if it were so important they would not have taken pictures and alerted the media.
Which juries ruled against him in this "fraud" case?
That's right, you stupid lying magat. There doesn't have to be a victim in an attempted murder, but it's still illegal. Similarly fraud does not require someone to be upset with the arrangement for it to be illegal.
Financial loss due to dishonesty is fraud and can be punished.
Dumbass...If someone knowingly tries to kill someone, there is a victim.
The claim is that Trump, knowingly, committed fraud. Who's the victim?
Everyone involved in Trump’s transaction, is completely happy. No one, so much, as complained and EVERYONE knew what transpired.
Have you ever gotten a loan without the bank verifying the value of your collateral?
You're an idiot. There was a decrease in amount of interest your orange jesus should have paid. Retard.
I answered the question numb nuts. The law does not say you can take them as long as you bring them back.
What was the rate he should have paid? That's the thing your inbred mind doesn't understand. You dont have any idea what the interest rate should have been...because interest rates to developers are always negotiable. You're repeating the talking points from financial idiots. You're actually "retarded" when it comes to this topic.
There was NO FINANCIAL LOSS.
Let's hear that one. Come on let's hear it.
So, the banks frauded themselves by not doing a better background check? Did the bank sue him for fraud?
Doesn't have to be. idiot.
He did.
The financial instituion(s)
I doubt your orange jesus is happy about it.
They do now.
Irrelevant. But I know I never told them I had a house 3x the square feet it really is.
Under Greedtard's definition of "loss", his business operated at a loss every year simply because he didn't sell more cabinets.
OK...
You're an idiot. There was a decrease in amount of interest your orange jesus should have paid. Retard.
You're a retard. The difference is I didn't declare I sold more than I actually did. phlegmwad.
Irrelevant under your definition of "loss" above.
You still dont understand what you're even trying to argue, do you moron? "Sales" have nothing to do with the "loss" you're saying the bank suffered. Under your premise of "loss", your business would be a "loss" every year simply because you didn't sell, "more". Doesn't matter how much more. You didn't sell more... If only you had sold "more" it wouldn't have been a loss. The bank suffered a "loss" because they didn't make "more" interest. It is just a stupid argument to try and make.
NO ONE knows what Trumps interest rate "should have been" because interest rates to developers are negotiable. Thus, NO ONE suffered a "loss". NO ONE was defrauded.
Last edited:
He wasn't getting a 30 year fixed mortgage.
Did the banks sue him for fraud?
Most developers I have heard renegotiate their loans all the time and haggle. Hell, each development is different.
Just joined this past Saturday? Everyone, please take a moment and welcome Raoul and ET’s gay love child to the board.
^^^Deflection and irrelevance. You Godless lying trumptard oath breaker.
In civil litigation, allegations of fraud might be based on a misrepresentation of fact that was either intentional or negligent. For a statement to be an intentional misrepresentation, the person who made it must either have known the statement was false or been reckless as to its truth. The speaker must have also intended that the person to whom the statement was made would rely on it. The hearer must then have reasonably relied on the promise and also been harmed because of that reliance.
Greed's ignorance knows no bounds.
The hillbilly from OW with no formal education will argue any topic, regardless of the fact he has no understanding of what he's saying, because he's parroting talking points from liberal media outlets.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THE ORIGINS OF FINANCIAL LOSS GREED
The hillbilly from OW with no formal education will argue any topic, regardless of the fact he has no understanding of what he's saying, because he's parroting talking points from liberal media outlets.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THE ORIGINS OF FINANCIAL LOSS GREED
Um, I was thinking the amount being way too high makes it egregious, but you do you.
Doctor Gonzo is the attorney, dumbass.
Did your orange jesus claim on a financial statement that his penthouse is almost 3x it's actual size??
It's a yes or no question.
