The Daily AOC
Comments
-
It ain't quite that simple. There's processes and procedures and management rep letters and all sorts of shit to preclude that from happening. You have to be a total fuckwad CPA firm to get caught with your pants down that far.2001400ex said:
I don't know if the pipeline situation fits. But it's clear the bank could be held liable if they are aware, or should have been aware, of illegal activity.MikeDamone said:
I read it. Doesn’t seem like you did or you wouldn’t have posted it. It has nothing to with the topic. Dumbshit. Nice attempt at a quick google search and a faint hope it would turn up something to bail you out. It didn’t.2001400ex said:
So you don't want to read.RaceBannon said:
That's what I thought2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more
Nothing
Same thing with CPAs. If they find that the CPA should have known about the fraud, they are held liable.
BTW, every CPA firm also has E&O insurance in place for the occasional fuck up even with all those checks in place.
#PCAOB superiority guy
-
Arthur Andersen was said fuckwad CPA firm.PurpleThrobber said:
It ain't quite that simple. There's processes and procedures and management rep letters and all sorts of shit to preclude that from happening. You have to be a total fuckwad CPA firm to get caught with your pants down that far.2001400ex said:
I don't know if the pipeline situation fits. But it's clear the bank could be held liable if they are aware, or should have been aware, of illegal activity.MikeDamone said:
I read it. Doesn’t seem like you did or you wouldn’t have posted it. It has nothing to with the topic. Dumbshit. Nice attempt at a quick google search and a faint hope it would turn up something to bail you out. It didn’t.2001400ex said:
So you don't want to read.RaceBannon said:
That's what I thought2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more
Nothing
Same thing with CPAs. If they find that the CPA should have known about the fraud, they are held liable.
BTW, every CPA firm also has E&O insurance in place for the occasional fuck up even with all those checks in place.
#PCAOB superiority guy -
It happens (Enron, Countrywide, Siemens, big one in Japan over a decade ago), but major accountancy liability cases are rare, and getting rarer.PurpleThrobber said:
It ain't quite that simple. There's processes and procedures and management rep letters and all sorts of shit to preclude that from happening. You have to be a total fuckwad CPA firm to get caught with your pants down that far.2001400ex said:
I don't know if the pipeline situation fits. But it's clear the bank could be held liable if they are aware, or should have been aware, of illegal activity.MikeDamone said:
I read it. Doesn’t seem like you did or you wouldn’t have posted it. It has nothing to with the topic. Dumbshit. Nice attempt at a quick google search and a faint hope it would turn up something to bail you out. It didn’t.2001400ex said:
So you don't want to read.RaceBannon said:
That's what I thought2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more
Nothing
Same thing with CPAs. If they find that the CPA should have known about the fraud, they are held liable.
BTW, every CPA firm also has E&O insurance in place for the occasional fuck up even with all those checks in place.
#PCAOB superiority guy -
MikeDamone said:
Arthur Andersen was said fuckwad CPA firm.PurpleThrobber said:
It ain't quite that simple. There's processes and procedures and management rep letters and all sorts of shit to preclude that from happening. You have to be a total fuckwad CPA firm to get caught with your pants down that far.2001400ex said:
I don't know if the pipeline situation fits. But it's clear the bank could be held liable if they are aware, or should have been aware, of illegal activity.MikeDamone said:
I read it. Doesn’t seem like you did or you wouldn’t have posted it. It has nothing to with the topic. Dumbshit. Nice attempt at a quick google search and a faint hope it would turn up something to bail you out. It didn’t.2001400ex said:
So you don't want to read.RaceBannon said:
That's what I thought2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more
Nothing
Same thing with CPAs. If they find that the CPA should have known about the fraud, they are held liable.
BTW, every CPA firm also has E&O insurance in place for the occasional fuck up even with all those checks in place.
#PCAOB superiority guy
-
You are correct sir. It's right there in those Banking regulations Hondo posted. Can't you read?jecornel said:So a business person gets a loan to open a restaurant and he/she/they kitchen has a fire, burns down a business next store. The bank providing the loan should be required to pay for clean up and remodel?
Am I tracking correctly? -
Pre-SOXMikeDamone said:
Arthur Andersen was said fuckwad CPA firm.PurpleThrobber said:
It ain't quite that simple. There's processes and procedures and management rep letters and all sorts of shit to preclude that from happening. You have to be a total fuckwad CPA firm to get caught with your pants down that far.2001400ex said:
I don't know if the pipeline situation fits. But it's clear the bank could be held liable if they are aware, or should have been aware, of illegal activity.MikeDamone said:
I read it. Doesn’t seem like you did or you wouldn’t have posted it. It has nothing to with the topic. Dumbshit. Nice attempt at a quick google search and a faint hope it would turn up something to bail you out. It didn’t.2001400ex said:
So you don't want to read.RaceBannon said:
That's what I thought2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more
Nothing
Same thing with CPAs. If they find that the CPA should have known about the fraud, they are held liable.
BTW, every CPA firm also has E&O insurance in place for the occasional fuck up even with all those checks in place.
#PCAOB superiority guy
It ain't the old days. Your shit better not stink as a CPA firm and the wall of independence best be in place between the client and the firm.
HondoFS knows this shit. He's just trolling for bucks. Same old same old.
-
And cocksucking, don't forget the cocksucking.TurdBuffer said:
So far out of your element here. Stick to what you know: Burgers.2001400ex said:
Why am I not surprised that you think banking regulations are gibberish.SFGbob said:
Called it, gibberish.2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more -
Don't fag out the thread yet. That's Hondo's job.SFGbob said:
And cocksuck, don't forget the cocksucking.TurdBuffer said:
So far out of your element here. Stick to what you know: Burgers.2001400ex said:
Why am I not surprised that you think banking regulations are gibberish.SFGbob said:
Called it, gibberish.2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more -
Truth. SEC has locked this shit down. And getting lockier every day.GrundleStiltzkin said:
It happens (Enron, Countrywide, Siemens, big one in Japan over a decade ago), but major accountancy liability cases are rare, and getting rarer.PurpleThrobber said:
It ain't quite that simple. There's processes and procedures and management rep letters and all sorts of shit to preclude that from happening. You have to be a total fuckwad CPA firm to get caught with your pants down that far.2001400ex said:
I don't know if the pipeline situation fits. But it's clear the bank could be held liable if they are aware, or should have been aware, of illegal activity.MikeDamone said:
I read it. Doesn’t seem like you did or you wouldn’t have posted it. It has nothing to with the topic. Dumbshit. Nice attempt at a quick google search and a faint hope it would turn up something to bail you out. It didn’t.2001400ex said:
So you don't want to read.RaceBannon said:
That's what I thought2001400ex said:
https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/8000-1250.htmlRaceBannon said:
Bump2001400ex said:Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
But but but AOC!!!!! Farting cows!!!! Crayons!!!!!
Tell us more
Nothing
Same thing with CPAs. If they find that the CPA should have known about the fraud, they are held liable.
BTW, every CPA firm also has E&O insurance in place for the occasional fuck up even with all those checks in place.
#PCAOB superiority guy
-
First of all the claim was that voters were turned away on account of their skin color, but I'd love to see your "studies" Hondo, and maybe you should think about sharing them with the Washington Post because they gave Hillary's claims 4 Pinocchio's.2001400ex said:
Hey fuckstick.. There we studies that show people were turned away at the polls on Wisconsin and they were in disproportionately black areas.SFGbob said:
Yes, but he was technically correct and just as Hillary's comments regarding blacks being turned away from the polls on account of their skin color was based upon fact while being completely factually inaccurate.RaceBannon said:
But we're making assupmptions2001400ex said:You guys are making a lot of assumptions. You know nothing about the pipeline spill and therefore have zero knowledge of whether the bank could be held liable. Yes, under the right circumstances they could be held liable. I'm not sure if they could in this instance.
But keep up with your ignorance cause AOC is in your head.
JFC you made a statement of fact that was 100% bullshit
This is what you do to yourself when you lack the ability to admit when you've put your head up your ass and you're incapable of shame.
Are you ignorant on purpose or just stupid?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/06/hillary-clintons-claims-about-voter-suppression-georgia-wisconsin/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d214d1b36a1c
They talk all about your "studies" Hondo. -
Clinton made a series of specific claims that were way off-base.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in 2013 had no bearing on Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin study she relied on for her 40,000 estimate says its findings from two counties should not be extrapolated to form statewide conclusions. Her spokesman did not cite any study for the 80,000 estimate. Voter registration in Georgia did not decline from 2012 to 2016.
Wrong on multiple levels, seriously misleading and worth a cumulative Four Pinocchios.
Four Pinocchios -
WE are making assumptions??2001400ex said:You guys are making a lot of assumptions. You know nothing about the pipeline spill and therefore have zero knowledge of whether the bank could be held liable. Yes, under the right circumstances they could be held liable. I'm not sure if they could in this instance.
But keep up with your ignorance cause AOC is in your head.
W.JW
-
2001400ex said:
You guys are making a lot of assumptions. You know nothing about the pipeline spill and therefore have zero knowledge of whether the bank could be held liable. Yes, under the right circumstances they could be held liable. I'm not sure if they could in this instance.
But keep up with your ignorance cause AOC is in your head.
-
-
So there was studies and she took their results and lied about them. Thanks Bob for explaining my exact point for me.SFGbob said:Clinton made a series of specific claims that were way off-base.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in 2013 had no bearing on Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin study she relied on for her 40,000 estimate says its findings from two counties should not be extrapolated to form statewide conclusions. Her spokesman did not cite any study for the 80,000 estimate. Voter registration in Georgia did not decline from 2012 to 2016.
Wrong on multiple levels, seriously misleading and worth a cumulative Four Pinocchios.
Four Pinocchios -
You said her comments were based upon facts, you lying and worthless Kunt.2001400ex said:
So there was studies and she took their results and lied about them. Thanks Bob for explaining my exact point for me.SFGbob said:Clinton made a series of specific claims that were way off-base.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in 2013 had no bearing on Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin study she relied on for her 40,000 estimate says its findings from two counties should not be extrapolated to form statewide conclusions. Her spokesman did not cite any study for the 80,000 estimate. Voter registration in Georgia did not decline from 2012 to 2016.
Wrong on multiple levels, seriously misleading and worth a cumulative Four Pinocchios.
Four Pinocchios -
-
Is AOC advocating for a Federal program to provide security for all houses of worship all over the globe? Other than running her mouth, what exactly is her point here?
-
Just being tone deafSFGbob said:Is AOC advocating for a Federal program to provide security for all houses of worship all over the globe? Other than running her mouth, what exactly is her point here?
-
Her point it religion isn't allowed in socialism/communism.SFGbob said:Is AOC advocating for a Federal program to provide security for all houses of worship all over the globe? Other than running her mouth, what exactly is her point here?
-
Her point is controlling others to benefit herself. That's Socialism in a nutshell.SFGbob said:Is AOC advocating for a Federal program to provide security for all houses of worship all over the globe? Other than running her mouth, what exactly is her point here?
-
-
Why is Randell afraid of a tiny brown girl that only fox goober deplorables know about?GrundleStiltzkin said: -
-
-
She says "we had and carried supermajorities in the house and senate"..."they had to amend the constitution to keep FDR from getting reelected." Set aside her ignorance of the timline, who the fuck did she think was amending said constitution? Does she know amendments work?GrundleStiltzkin said:
-
HillsboroDuck said:
She says "we had and carried supermajorities in the house and senate"..."they had to amend the constitution to keep FDR from getting reelected." Set aside her ignorance of the timline, who the fuck did she think was amending said constitution? Does she know amendments work?GrundleStiltzkin said:
-
-
The bank gave Bob a car loan. He got drunk after hitting the dive for 5 hours, hit a pedestrian, and put him in intensive care. It's the bank's fault. LOL
-
She is a fag because she has a hyphenated last name
You are only allowed to do that if you are a college or pro athlete
It is known.
