Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Surprise surprise!
Sledog
Member Posts: 37,893 
in Tug Tavern
Who'd of thought Dems don't want people to know how many illegals are here.......
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/reps-jordan-and-meadows-democrats-dont-care-about-the-integrity-of-the-census
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/reps-jordan-and-meadows-democrats-dont-care-about-the-integrity-of-the-census
Comments
-
I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
-
So you agree with the libs we shouldn't know how many illegals are here?HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
What purpose would that serve? -
You're expecting to ask this question and get good information back. That's funny.Sledog said:
So you agree with the libs we shouldn't know how many illegals are here?HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
What purpose would that serve?
-
Do you expect an honest discussion with a dude that beats off to a partisan opinion article that says Democrats need illegals to vote to survive as a party and Democrats want the census results to lack integrity?HHusky said:
You're expecting to ask this question and get good information back. That's funny.Sledog said:
So you agree with the libs we shouldn't know how many illegals are here?HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
What purpose would that serve? -
Got to love how you compare a black female white collar professional to gardener.HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
-
Yeah, beat off to Hondo lying his ass off about Banks being held liable for lending money to people who later have an accident.2001400ex said:
Do you expect an honest discussion with a dude that beats off to a partisan opinion article that says Democrats need illegals to vote to survive as a party and Democrats want the census results to lack integrity?HHusky said:
You're expecting to ask this question and get good information back. That's funny.Sledog said:
So you agree with the libs we shouldn't know how many illegals are here?HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
What purpose would that serve? -
Lil lyin BobSFGbob said:
Yeah, beat off to Hondo lying his ass off about Banks being held liable for lending money to people who later have an accident.2001400ex said:
Do you expect an honest discussion with a dude that beats off to a partisan opinion article that says Democrats need illegals to vote to survive as a party and Democrats want the census results to lack integrity?HHusky said:
You're expecting to ask this question and get good information back. That's funny.Sledog said:
So you agree with the libs we shouldn't know how many illegals are here?HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
What purpose would that serve? -
Yeah, and you never said anything about the MAGA hat wearing kids.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin BobSFGbob said:
Yeah, beat off to Hondo lying his ass off about Banks being held liable for lending money to people who later have an accident.2001400ex said:
Do you expect an honest discussion with a dude that beats off to a partisan opinion article that says Democrats need illegals to vote to survive as a party and Democrats want the census results to lack integrity?HHusky said:
You're expecting to ask this question and get good information back. That's funny.Sledog said:
So you agree with the libs we shouldn't know how many illegals are here?HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
What purpose would that serve? -
Projecting. Again.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin BobSFGbob said:
Yeah, beat off to Hondo lying his ass off about Banks being held liable for lending money to people who later have an accident.2001400ex said:
Do you expect an honest discussion with a dude that beats off to a partisan opinion article that says Democrats need illegals to vote to survive as a party and Democrats want the census results to lack integrity?HHusky said:
You're expecting to ask this question and get good information back. That's funny.Sledog said:
So you agree with the libs we shouldn't know how many illegals are here?HHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
What purpose would that serve? -
AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
-
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you. -
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie -
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else. -
2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility. -
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant. -
Shut up2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else. -
ThudHHusky said:I hope Meadows brings one of Trump's former gardeners up on stage and tells us the gardener thinks so too. Classic move!
-
So no examples. Got it.2001400ex said:
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant. -
2001400ex said:
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant.
Your establishment shill-masters don't agree with AOC on many things.
Fuck off.
-
-
I’ll never forget when the financial institution that financed the build of the Exxon Valdez had to pay for the clean up in prince William sound. What a cool day for America man!2001400ex said:
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant. -
RaceBannon said:
It’s nuts that people have to buy food. People literally die without food. In my mind, no one should have to choose between food and luxuries. It’s wild that candidates have not publicly supported giving everyone all the food they desire. -
Funny you mention that.MikeDamone said:
I’ll never forget when the financial institution that financed the build of the Exxon Valdez had to pay for the clean up in prince William sound. What a cool day for America man!2001400ex said:
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant.
Well, here's something else depressing that you can add to your oil spill woes. The Exxon Valdez disaster, which occurred on March 24, 1989, played a major role in the collapse of the economy some 19 years later. See, as Stein documented, after lengthy litigation, Exxon managed to get the amount of punitive compensatory damages reduced from the hoped-for $5 billion to a paltry $500 million. But, back when Exxon had reason to imagine it might actually have to part with the $5 billion, the oil giant needed to find a way to cover its hindquarters. Exxon found a savior in the form of J.P. Morgan & Co., who extended the beleaguered company a line of credit in the amount of $4.8 billion.
Of course, that put J.P. Morgan on the hook for any potential judgment against Exxon. So the bank went looking for a way to mitigate that risk.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/605080/amp
That being said, you don't even know if building the ship was done with current capital from Exxon or if they obtained financing for it. -
That being said you still don't have an example
-
Not for the scenario AOC described liar.2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you. -
You posted bullshit in defense of AOC that had nothing to do with the situation she was talking about. She wasn't saying the bank was liable because it had some kind of prior knowledge of an accident. She was claiming they should be held liable simply because they lent the pipeline company money to build it.2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
So in a thread where we were all discussing AOC's comment you decided to stick your head up your and make a point that's not about AOC?
And you make this "point" by claiming I'm "scared" of her but you're not making a point about AOC. Logic only a Kunt could love.
Got to love when Hondo gets exposed as a lying dumbfuck, he just ratchets up the gibberish to 11. -
Interesting factoid, but zero comparability to AOC's hypotheticals. And financial or default liability <> criminal liability.2001400ex said:
Funny you mention that.MikeDamone said:
I’ll never forget when the financial institution that financed the build of the Exxon Valdez had to pay for the clean up in prince William sound. What a cool day for America man!2001400ex said:
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant.
Well, here's something else depressing that you can add to your oil spill woes. The Exxon Valdez disaster, which occurred on March 24, 1989, played a major role in the collapse of the economy some 19 years later. See, as Stein documented, after lengthy litigation, Exxon managed to get the amount of punitive compensatory damages reduced from the hoped-for $5 billion to a paltry $500 million. But, back when Exxon had reason to imagine it might actually have to part with the $5 billion, the oil giant needed to find a way to cover its hindquarters. Exxon found a savior in the form of J.P. Morgan & Co., who extended the beleaguered company a line of credit in the amount of $4.8 billion.
Of course, that put J.P. Morgan on the hook for any potential judgment against Exxon. So the bank went looking for a way to mitigate that risk.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/605080/amp
That being said, you don't even know if building the ship was done with current capital from Exxon or if they obtained financing for it. -
Hondo's not even trying to make a point about AOC, he is just trying to let everyone know that I'm scared of her. That was the entire "point" he was making.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Interesting factoid, but zero comparability to AOC's hypotheticals. And financial or default liability <> criminal liability.2001400ex said:
Funny you mention that.MikeDamone said:
I’ll never forget when the financial institution that financed the build of the Exxon Valdez had to pay for the clean up in prince William sound. What a cool day for America man!2001400ex said:
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant.
Well, here's something else depressing that you can add to your oil spill woes. The Exxon Valdez disaster, which occurred on March 24, 1989, played a major role in the collapse of the economy some 19 years later. See, as Stein documented, after lengthy litigation, Exxon managed to get the amount of punitive compensatory damages reduced from the hoped-for $5 billion to a paltry $500 million. But, back when Exxon had reason to imagine it might actually have to part with the $5 billion, the oil giant needed to find a way to cover its hindquarters. Exxon found a savior in the form of J.P. Morgan & Co., who extended the beleaguered company a line of credit in the amount of $4.8 billion.
Of course, that put J.P. Morgan on the hook for any potential judgment against Exxon. So the bank went looking for a way to mitigate that risk.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/605080/amp
That being said, you don't even know if building the ship was done with current capital from Exxon or if they obtained financing for it. -
Agree it's not relevant to AOC. I was responding to Damoans strawman.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Interesting factoid, but zero comparability to AOC's hypotheticals. And financial or default liability <> criminal liability.2001400ex said:
Funny you mention that.MikeDamone said:
I’ll never forget when the financial institution that financed the build of the Exxon Valdez had to pay for the clean up in prince William sound. What a cool day for America man!2001400ex said:
I have stated that I don't agree with AOC on many things. This situation is even hypothetical. And there are circumstances where attorneys will go after deep pockets, if you don't understand that basic rule of America, I can't help you.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
What is there to prove? I stated that I don't know enough about the pipeline spill. But if the bank knew, or should have known, the spill could happen. They could be held liable. And I posted the regulatory link to show that.RaceBannon said:
If only you hadn't failed miserably to prove that2001400ex said:
Banks can be held liable. Idiot.SFGbob said:AOC: "Hypothetically, if there was a leak, from the DAP why shouldn't Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it?"
She is then roundly mocked.
Hondo then jumps into to defend her:
Shocking that ignorant people don't understand how banks providing financing could be held liable for the actions of their customers.
The only liar here as always Hondo is you.
So just repeat the lie
But stay Ignorant like Bob.
Tbe point I'm making isn't even about AOC. It's about partisan people like you and Bob that are scared of her. So you try to monk everything she says without even knowing if the statement is true. You think it sounds dumb so you roll with it can can't consider anything else.
Still waiting for an example.... just one.
Her question/point was dumb. Speaking of partisan, you have to defend everything she says. It’s pathological.
Yes, if the bank financed a known illegal pipeline that burst into flames and killed people I suppose they would be liable in part. Except that has never or would ever happen. Dumlbshit. What scenario goes through your pea brain to think this is even a remote possibility.
And whether it's happened in the past is irrelevant. Things change all the time. Prior to Arthur Anderson, no huge CPA firm had been taken down for fraud at a couple clients. Prior to the great recession, no large investment brokerage like Lehman brothers had gone down (post great depression). In other words, your defense by saying "it's never happened before" is laughable and ignorant.
Well, here's something else depressing that you can add to your oil spill woes. The Exxon Valdez disaster, which occurred on March 24, 1989, played a major role in the collapse of the economy some 19 years later. See, as Stein documented, after lengthy litigation, Exxon managed to get the amount of punitive compensatory damages reduced from the hoped-for $5 billion to a paltry $500 million. But, back when Exxon had reason to imagine it might actually have to part with the $5 billion, the oil giant needed to find a way to cover its hindquarters. Exxon found a savior in the form of J.P. Morgan & Co., who extended the beleaguered company a line of credit in the amount of $4.8 billion.
Of course, that put J.P. Morgan on the hook for any potential judgment against Exxon. So the bank went looking for a way to mitigate that risk.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/605080/amp
That being said, you don't even know if building the ship was done with current capital from Exxon or if they obtained financing for it.
If you read further in that article, that transaction created the credit default swap. Another interesting factoid. -
i am down if this is retroactive for my loans .... but then Fatters gf would no longer exist for him .... guess there is always a cost when doing biznassMikeDamone said:RaceBannon said:
It’s nuts that people have to buy food. People literally die without food. In my mind, no one should have to choose between food and luxuries. It’s wild that candidates have not publicly supported giving everyone all the food they desire.
