I've dissected Cuban's X with every filter that I have. I can't find a way to get my drawers in a bunch over it.
But I'll still offer a , GFY'self to you. just for good measure.
Judge puts Trump out of business in NY?
- Thread starter UncleMark
- Start date
But I'll still offer a , GFY'self to you. just for good measure.
Well, he was arguing with Scott Adams, whose drawers start out already bunched.
There are those of us that start with ruffled drawers then work towards unruffling them, then there's those who it takes a bit of calm to simmer down a notch.
Obviously I am normally calm and even tempered. Obviously. You should take this as a lesson.
The bitch runs the guy over and "She was *not* charged with attempted murder but was instead charged with first-degree attempted assault as well as other charges.
The officer suffered a broken leg."
Criminal justice graduate. smdh
I've never thought of O'leary as far left. He seems to be a regular on Fox Business...
So this is the type of case that you think the state AG should handle instead of local authorities? Is that the way it works in Indiana, the state AG goes after common criminals?
Do you even know who the AG is in Indiana? Does he go after the "real criminals"? Seems like he's too busy being reprimanded by the Indiana Supreme Court (more than once) for violating ethical standards. Come to think of it he seems to have a lot in common with Trump...
Is Indiana so berift of actual criminals that Rokita has nothing better to do than verbally attack the physician who provided health care to the 10 yr old rape victim from Ohio? So you're going to attack James for going after Trump (and in the process enriching the state's coffers and benefiting people in the state overall).
But Rokita steps so far over the line defaming the woman who provided care that the Indiana Supreme Court feels compelled to step in and reprimand him? And no snide remarks from you about actual criminals in Indiana, and how Rokita should make better use of his time?
You never disappoint. You're a model of consistency...
Rokita under investigation again by Indiana attorney disciplinary commission
Attorney General Todd Rokita is under investigation again by the Indiana attorney disciplinary commission, weeks after the state Supreme Court publicly reprimanded him. The new inquiry is over Rokitas reaction to that public reprimand.
www.wfyi.org
The judge knows better than to eff with someone at that time of the month. CASE DISMISSED ! ! !
Your neighbors don't let you around their kids, do they.So this is the type of case that you think the state AG should handle instead of local authorities? Is that the way it works in Indiana, the state AG goes after common criminals?
Do you even know who the AG is in Indiana? Does he go after the "real criminals"? Seems like he's too busy being reprimanded by the Indiana Supreme Court (more than once) for violating ethical standards. Come to think of it he seems to have a lot in common with Trump...
Is Indiana so berift of actual criminals that Rokita has nothing better to do than verbally attack the physician who provided health care to the 10 yr old rape victim from Ohio? So you're going to attack James for going after Trump (and in the process enriching the state's coffers and benefiting people in the state overall).
But Rokita steps so far over the line defaming the woman who provided care that the Indiana Supreme Court feels compelled to step in and reprimand him? And no snide remarks from you about actual criminals in Indiana, and how Rokita should make better use of his time?
You never disappoint. You're a model of consistency...
Rokita under investigation again by Indiana attorney disciplinary commission
Attorney General Todd Rokita is under investigation again by the Indiana attorney disciplinary commission, weeks after the state Supreme Court publicly reprimanded him. The new inquiry is over Rokitas reaction to that public reprimand.www.wfyi.org
Yeah...whatever his lean...he clearly lays out the argument I've been making for months...which a partisan simpleton like you has failed to understand.
I'm convinced you're one of these retired, untested, Bloomington professors that never layed your own sack out on the line, but made a career out of grift, and anecdotal commentary with no actual skin in the game...
Aka...a pussy.
So much winning.
Trump Basically Just Lost the New York Bank Fraud Case Before It Even Started
SAM WOLFE/ReutersFormer President Donald Trump, his top executives, and heirs were declared completely liable of “persistent and repeated fraud”—and the real estate empire was unceremoniously stripped of its business licenses in New York—after a judge’s powerful ruling Tuesday ahead of a massive...news.yahoo.com
And in a stunning development, the judge has already ordered the complete dissolution of the fabled Trump Organization–the tycoon’s pride and joy, the empire that made him famous and elevated him into the White House. The Trump Organization and its sister companies will be sent into receivership to be under the control of a court-appointed officer.
@JamieDimonsBalls can you explain for us peasants what these special purpose acquisition companies are and why this isn't a giant scam?
Good. Now maybe he'll be able to pay his lawyers and E. Jean and his fines.
Lol.... The company has $5m in total revenue
And? How much revenue did Broadcast.com or whatever it was have when Cuban sold it off for billions?
So you're saying it's comparable to what was considered one of the worst acquisitions in US history?
I'd agree.
The number of securities fraud attorneys in New York licking their chops at the thought of a future lawsuit against Trump right now?
Okay dbm’s post coupled with that trump pic is funnier than shit. This is why I don’t rag on him like the left. He brings entertainment value. Hilarious. Well done son
SPACs are shell companies that make massive profits for the sponsors, much like the old Reverse Merger deals from the 80s and 90s. They are a giant scam, as evidenced by their performance since trading. Rule changes created a significant opportunity for a renewed proliferation of these vehicles beginning ~6-7 years ago.
There are many good reads on them, but here's are two of the better ones from a legit institutions:
SPAC Market Outlook | Russell Investments
A deep-dive look into the factors that caused the SPAC market’s decline—and the outlook in the year ahead.
russellinvestments.com
Keep in mind, SPAC returns have actually gotten worse while the market has been on a tear since publication
All that said, any individual SPAC opportunity could be successful and there have been a few examples (IIRC Hostess may have been one).
Is that the same strip mall that Saul Goodman offices in?
I miss breaking bad and better call Saul. As a combo im not sure there’s ever been anything done better
So, long story short, they are effectively a vehicle for companies to go public, but with less transparency than would otherwise be required for a traditional IPO?SPACs are shell companies that make massive profits for the sponsors, much like the old Reverse Merger deals from the 80s and 90s. They are a giant scam, as evidenced by their performance since trading. Rule changes created a significant opportunity for a renewed proliferation of these vehicles beginning ~6-7 years ago.
There are many good reads on them, but here's are two of the better ones from a legit institutions:
SPAC Market Outlook | Russell Investments
A deep-dive look into the factors that caused the SPAC market’s decline—and the outlook in the year ahead.
Keep in mind, SPAC returns have actually gotten worse while the market has been on a tear since publication
All that said, any individual SPAC opportunity could be successful and there have been a few examples (IIRC Hostess may have been one).
Less transparency and lower costs. For existing shareholders of the company, they could achieve an outlier valuation (higher than they could get in the private markets or via traditional IPO). New shareholders are the ones that get screwed.
So this response to this comment triggered you so profusely?
I've never thought of O'leary as far left. He seems to be a regular on Fox Business...
Nothing at all to do with your bombastic personal attack, I merely said I had never thought of O'leary as "far left"...
Then you decided you needed to go off on me, accuse me of being a "professor" (wherever did you get that idea?). Not even sure what "made a career out of grift" could possibly mean with regards to me, since I truly don't have a pot to piss in. My "career" at least for the past 20 yrs was as direct support for individuals with disabilities, and believe me that don't pay much. Esp considering exactly what "direct support" entails.
One of the questions they asked me in my hiring interview 20 yrs ago, was do bodily fluids bother you. I needed the job and said "no, not at all". I lied...
