Fragile Bird Posted March 8, 2017 Author Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Here ya go There is no reference to a conviction for fraud in that story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 He's never been convicted of fraud or anything else, that's why. LOL. He has been involved in thousands of lawsuits as a plaintiff and a defendant, and has settled several of them, including the one about Trump University. Whether his business practices are shady or even unethical is a different issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 9 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: There is no reference to a conviction for fraud in that story. The 3.5 million his dad paid to the casino where he bought 3.5 million in chips and then walked away is the reference. And he was charged with something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 minute ago, Kalbear said: The 3.5 million his dad paid to the casino where he bought 3.5 million in chips and then walked away is the reference. And he was charged with something. So there is no conviction for fraud? OK. Thank you for clarifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, Swordfish said: So there is no conviction for fraud? OK. Thank you for clarifying. I have no idea; I'm just talking about the loan. Which was apparently rated as an illegal loan. Is it a fraud case per se? Dunno. It certainly was illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kalbear said: I have no idea; I'm just talking about the loan. Which was apparently rated as an illegal loan. Is it a fraud case per se? Dunno. It certainly was illegal. Um. Ok. So your response has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Got it. Thanks for clarifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 5 minutes ago, Swordfish said: Um. Ok. So your response has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Got it. Thanks for clarifying. She asked what the loan thing was about. I stated as such. And he was actually convicted of fraudulently accepting a loan per what @maarsen stated, as he didn't apply for a loan nor did he treat it as a loan, and both are a form of fraud. Per this cool infographic, he has had 3500 cases against him and settled or lost about 200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Just now, Kalbear said: She asked what the loan thing was about. I stated as such. And he was actually convicted of fraudulently accepting a loan per what @maarsen stated, as he didn't apply for a loan nor did he treat it as a loan, and both are a form of fraud. Where is the link to his conviction for fraudulently accepting a loan? Again, google turned up nothing for me, but perhaps your google foo is stronger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Week Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, OldGimletEye said: I swear baby, I had a healthcare plan. I was going to bring the plan to ya. It wasn't my fault! I ran out of gas! Uh, er, I had a flat tire! I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners! An old friend came from out of town! My car got stolen! There was an earthquake! A terrible flood! Locust! It wasn't my fault!!!!! Take it easy. /Elwood Such insanity - I wish that I could count on the Dems to rout them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 16 minutes ago, Swordfish said: Where is the link to his conviction for fraudulently accepting a loan? Again, google turned up nothing for me, but perhaps your google foo is stronger. I listed it above - it is illegal to take casino winnings as a loan, and the New Jersey casino association charged him with it. Point of fact, buying casino chips with the goal of simply giving the casino money and avoiding loan is, ya know, fraudulent on its face. The case was apparently settled for him paying back $65k plus legal fees, because after it had gone to court for a year the casino was bankrupt anyway. Now this was a civil case, but they lost it. Are you looking specifically for only criminal fraud claims? To my knowledge Trump has never been involved in criminal fraud, though Trump U got real close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, Swordfish said: Where is the link to his conviction for fraudulently accepting a loan? Again, google turned up nothing for me, but perhaps your google foo is stronger. Would you buy a used car from him? Real estate? Invest in one of his businesses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, Swordfish said: Where is the link to his conviction for fraudulently accepting a loan? Again, google turned up nothing for me, but perhaps your google foo is stronger. I'm not familiar with any fraud prosecution, let alone conviction, levied at Trump. However, just a brief search at his previous misgivings is illuminating. His wikipedia page has largely been - forgive the too on the nose term - whitewashed. I had to look up his dad to find substantive links detailing his most egregious behavior vis-a-vis the federal government. Specifically, the Trump firm being in clear violation of the Fair Housing Act and discriminating against minorities. The proceedings grant insight into Trump's now pro forma tactic of attacking the credibility of legitimate institutions, but the eventual settlement was a clear victory for the Justice Department (that was overseen by Nixon for most of the prosecution, BTW) in forcing the Trumps to not only accept but advertise towards equal opportunity for housing. Anyway, considering the timeframe and the facts of the case, it's probably the the best harbinger clarifying that Trump's racism is not only distasteful, but illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 A clarification for why I posted the above: I need an arena to vent against the notions implied by @Cas Stark, @Swordfish, and far too many others in real life that there is even some scintilla of a parallel between Trump and Clinton, or the Dems, or whatever. Such false equivalency bullshit is just that. I teach selective exposure, Zaller's (1992) RAS model, and Prior's (2007) post-broadcast democracy to undergrads that look back at me with blank faces for a living. (For the uninitiated, Zaller details how the more politically informed one is, the more capable she is in rejecting dissonant information - e.g. the mental gymnastics Trump supporters must do weekly in order to align his wayward tweets with their preferences. Markus Prior details how the electorate has fundamentally changed towards individuals that are politically interested, and extremely partisan, whereas the comparatively uninterested moderates have disengaged with the political process in favor of video game, tweetbooking, facechatting, and what have you - fuck you I'm an old 31.) I have bent over backwards trying to depict "both sides" of Trump's concerted effort to delegitimize the media when teaching a media and politics course. No more. OMETS (student evaluations) are essential to my career, and I know there are plenty of Trump supporters as my students, but I am done with the false equivalencies. When you term the media the enemy of the American people, you abdicate that right. When POTUS accuses his predecessor of a federal crime while he's taking a morning shit, with less evidence than said shit, you abdicate that right. And when you try to equate the organized, concerted effort to keep Benghazi in the news by the right as a purely political objective with the ever-increasing evidence of Trump's inner-circle deliberately lying on Russia contacts within the first fucking month of his administration, you can go fuck yourself. /soapbox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 ^^^^^^^ HEAR, HEAR! https://media.tenor.co/images/14985343017c2666437ee43a9819abc4/raw /The Rock clearly smells what you're cooking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 21 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: /The Rock clearly smells what you're cooking... As an ever-disappointed wrestling fan, I very much appreciate the reference, along with the encouragement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 hours ago, Kalbear said: I listed it above - it is illegal to take casino winnings as a loan, and the New Jersey casino association charged him with it. Point of fact, buying casino chips with the goal of simply giving the casino money and avoiding loan is, ya know, fraudulent on its face. The case was apparently settled for him paying back $65k plus legal fees, because after it had gone to court for a year the casino was bankrupt anyway. Now this was a civil case, but they lost it. Are you looking specifically for only criminal fraud claims? To my knowledge Trump has never been involved in criminal fraud, though Trump U got real close. OK. So he wasn't convicted of fraudulentlyaccepting a loan, as you claimed earlier. Thank you for clarifying. 4 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Would you buy a used car from him? Real estate? Invest in one of his businesses? Certainly not. 2 hours ago, dmc515 said: A clarification for why I posted the above: I need an arena to vent against the notions implied by @Cas Stark, @Swordfish, and far too many others in real life that there is even some scintilla of a parallel between Trump and Clinton, or the Dems, or whatever. Such false equivalency bullshit is just that. I teach selective exposure, Zaller's (1992) RAS model, and Prior's (2007) post-broadcast democracy to undergrads that look back at me with blank faces for a living. (For the uninitiated, Zaller details how the more politically informed one is, the more capable she is in rejecting dissonant information - e.g. the mental gymnastics Trump supporters must do weekly in order to align his wayward tweets with their preferences. Markus Prior details how the electorate has fundamentally changed towards individuals that are politically interested, and extremely partisan, whereas the comparatively uninterested moderates have disengaged with the political process in favor of video game, tweetbooking, facechatting, and what have you - fuck you I'm an old 31.) I have bent over backwards trying to depict "both sides" of Trump's concerted effort to delegitimize the media when teaching a media and politics course. No more. OMETS (student evaluations) are essential to my career, and I know there are plenty of Trump supporters as my students, but I am done with the false equivalencies. When you term the media the enemy of the American people, you abdicate that right. When POTUS accuses his predecessor of a federal crime while he's taking a morning shit, with less evidence than said shit, you abdicate that right. And when you try to equate the organized, concerted effort to keep Benghazi in the news by the right as a purely political objective with the ever-increasing evidence of Trump's inner-circle deliberately lying on Russia contacts within the first fucking month of his administration, you can go fuck yourself. /soapbox. I have no idea what has given you the vapors here. I didn't even mention Clinton pr the democrats. We were talking about a couple false claims made by a couple people that he'd been convicted of fraud. You either care about facts or you don't. Your rant here is pretty much a complete non sequitur, and i have no idea where it came from, or shy you feel like it's relevant to anything I've said in this thread.. So.. You know, maybe climb down off your cross and pay attention to what is actually being written..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.