Timmy’s thread for general discussion

[squistion 898]

6 hours ago, jonmx said:

You lying POS.  Trump has never called for violence.  Of course you are so dumb, you seriously believe that when Trump tells his supporters to go march in peace, it is some kind of call to take up arms and overthrow the government.  

Never? 

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/02/trump-call-violence-presidency

The times Trump has advocated for violence

Recent revelations that former President Trump allegedly called for protesters gathered outside the White House in 2020 to be shot are part of a pattern of calling for violence that the 45th president followed throughout his years in office.

Driving the news: "Can't you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?" Trump allegedly asked about the demonstrators protesting the death of George Floyd, according to the forthcoming memoir by former Defense Secretary Mark Esper.

State of play: Trump made statements condoning and encouraging violence throughout his presidency.

July 2017: During a speech to law enforcement officers in Long Island, New York, Trump seemingly encouraged police officers to be rough with people they were arresting, per ABC News. "Please don't be too nice," he told the audience.

August 2017: In the aftermath of the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, Trump failed to unequivocally condemn the violence and said "many sides" were to blame, failing to distinguish between those who participated in the "Unite the Right" rally and those who showed up in opposition to it.

October 2018: While speaking at a Montana campaign rally, Trump publicly praised Montana's then-Rep. Greg Gianforte (R) — the state's current governor — for previously assaulting a reporter. "Any guy that can do a body slam, he is my type!" Trump said.

October 2019: A New York Times report outlined various strategies Trump had allegedly deliberated to keep migrants away from the U.S. southern border, including a water-filled trench with snakes or alligators and shooting migrants in the legs to slow them down.

May 2020: Trump used violent rhetoric when referring to protests in Minneapolis in the wake of George Floyd’s killing, tweeting, "when the looting starts, the shooting starts." The phrase has a racist history going back to police brutality against Black Americans in the 1960s, per the New York Times.

June 2020: Trump threatened to use the U.S. military to quell Black Lives Matter protests across the country. "If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them," Trump said.

August 2020: Trump expressed interest in sending the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, to confront protesters, per Vox. "We could fix Portland in, I would say, 45 minutes," Trump said.

September 2020: Trump lauded law enforcement officers for killing Michael Forest Reinoehl, a self-described Antifa member suspected of killing a right-wing activist the previous month. "That’s the way it has to be. There has to be retribution," Vox reported.

September 2020: When offered the chance to unequivocally condemn white supremacist violence during the first presidential debate, Trump failed to do so, instead telling the far-right Proud Boys that they should "stand back and stand by."

January 2021: At a rally preceding the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Trump repeated false claims that the 2020 election had been stolen and told supporters  "we're going to walk down to the Capitol," adding that "you'll never take back our country with weakness." that "we're going to walk down to the Capitol," adding that "you'll never take back our country with weakness."

[seafoam1 1,879]

1 minute ago, squistion said:

Never? 

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/02/trump-call-violence-presidency

The times Trump has advocated for violence

Recent revelations that former President Trump allegedly called for protesters gathered outside the White House in 2020 to be shot are part of a pattern of calling for violence that the 45th president followed throughout his years in office.

Driving the news: "Can't you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?" Trump allegedly asked about the demonstrators protesting the death of George Floyd, according to the forthcoming memoir by former Defense Secretary Mark Esper.

State of play: Trump made statements condoning and encouraging violence throughout his presidency.

July 2017: During a speech to law enforcement officers in Long Island, New York, Trump seemingly encouraged police officers to be rough with people they were arresting, per ABC News. "Please don't be too nice," he told the audience.

August 2017: In the aftermath of the white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, Trump failed to unequivocally condemn the violence and said "many sides" were to blame, failing to distinguish between those who participated in the "Unite the Right" rally and those who showed up in opposition to it.

October 2018: While speaking at a Montana campaign rally, Trump publicly praised Montana's then-Rep. Greg Gianforte (R) — the state's current governor — for previously assaulting a reporter. "Any guy that can do a body slam, he is my type!" Trump said.

October 2019: A New York Times report outlined various strategies Trump had allegedly deliberated to keep migrants away from the U.S. southern border, including a water-filled trench with snakes or alligators and shooting migrants in the legs to slow them down.

May 2020: Trump used violent rhetoric when referring to protests in Minneapolis in the wake of George Floyd’s killing, tweeting, "when the looting starts, the shooting starts." The phrase has a racist history going back to police brutality against Black Americans in the 1960s, per the New York Times.

June 2020: Trump threatened to use the U.S. military to quell Black Lives Matter protests across the country. "If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them," Trump said.

August 2020: Trump expressed interest in sending the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, to confront protesters, per Vox. "We could fix Portland in, I would say, 45 minutes," Trump said.

September 2020: Trump lauded law enforcement officers for killing Michael Forest Reinoehl, a self-described Antifa member suspected of killing a right-wing activist the previous month. "That’s the way it has to be. There has to be retribution," Vox reported.

September 2020: When offered the chance to unequivocally condemn white supremacist violence during the first presidential debate, Trump failed to do so, instead telling the far-right Proud Boys that they should "stand back and stand by."

January 2021: At a rally preceding the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Trump repeated false claims that the 2020 election had been stolen and told supporters  "we're going to walk down to the Capitol," adding that "you'll never take back our country with weakness." that "we're going to walk down to the Capitol," adding that "you'll never take back our country with weakness."

And yet it's the liberals who actually commit all the violence. 

 

[BrahmaBulls 269]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Dude. You get angrier with every post, I strongly, strongly disagree with you here, and elsewhere, and most all of the time. I think your posts are filled with crazy sh!t, sometimes really offensive: I think your views are dangerous and warped. 
 

But guess what? Unlike the bolded, I don’t think you’re a POS, I don’t think you’re a deliberate liar either; I just think you’re really really wrong. And I don’t hate you. FWIW I don’t hate Trump either: I dislike him a lot. But I save my hatred for mass murderers, rapists, truly evil people, the New England Patriots, etc. Trump and you don’t fall into that category. 

 

Who gives a #####?  You are a liar. And a troll.  

[jonnyutah 122]

12 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

The update is that what I wrote is true and Trump continues to call for violence on a daily basis. 
 

Also your casual hateful rhetoric about refugees has inspired me so I am grateful to you. I have spent the weekend organizing friends of mine to work to help Haitian refugees under the Welcome program. We are meeting soon to sponsor a family. You should know that you, in a way, helped to bring this about. 

Well when one of the inevitable murders, drunk driving, or disease outbreaks happens I can blame you with all the other people taking direct action to bring criminals here. 

It wont be just an exaggeration. You will be partially responsible for the death of americans. 

So congrats. 

Also not a one of us believes you have friends. 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

34 minutes ago, BrahmaBulls said:

Who gives a #####?  You are a liar. And a troll.  

I don’t hate you either. 
Also, you constantly ask who cares what I think? The answer is clear: you do. That’s why you respond to me so often. 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

23 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

Well when one of the inevitable murders, drunk driving, or disease outbreaks happens I can blame you with all the other people taking direct action to bring criminals here. 

It wont be just an exaggeration. You will be partially responsible for the death of americans. 

So congrats. 

Also not a one of us believes you have friends. 

First off the people we will be helping are refugees, not undocumented immigrants. And they’re families. They’re not criminals. Most undocumented immigrants aren’t either for that matter. 
 

Second, I have a few friends. You could be my friend. I’m a friendly guy. 

[squistion 898]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t hate you either. 
Also, you constantly ask who cares what I think? The answer is clear: you do. That’s why you respond to me so often. 

Exactly. That's why he responds to me too. And he can't help himself. 

[jonmx 1,593]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Dude. You get angrier with every post, I strongly, strongly disagree with you here, and elsewhere, and most all of the time. I think your posts are filled with crazy sh!t, sometimes really offensive: I think your views are dangerous and warped. 
 

But guess what? Unlike the bolded, I don’t think you’re a POS, I don’t think you’re a deliberate liar either; I just think you’re really really wrong. And I don’t hate you. FWIW I don’t hate Trump either: I dislike him a lot. But I save my hatred for mass murderers, rapists, truly evil people, the New England Patriots, etc. Trump and you don’t fall into that category. 

 

 

Nothing infuriates me more than unequal treatment with two grossly different standards.  When your side spews hate or uses rhetoric such as 'fight', you endlessly excuse them and insist their intentions are good and they would never mean to harm anyone.  But yet when conservstives say the same thing, you assume the most vile motives.  

It absolutely blows my mind that you being in commercial real estate, with numerous clients who submit financial statements to banks with estimated values of their properties, can in anyway justify a $454 million judgement for putting a value on a property which is higher than its tax assessment and could not care less what an actually appraiser says.  The state just arbitrarily penalizes a political opponent an obscene amount of cash to destroy an individual over something that did not harm a soul, and you can not admit that there is something wrong with that.   Our government has become insanely corrupt and people like you pretend nothing is wrong because it is Trump they are doing it do.  You are no better than someone watching a lynching and not saying anything.  This is why I am getting pissed off at society.  Our country has lost all the values of what made America great.  Today, we are no better than Russia.  But elite establishment of this country only wants to demonize those who point how corrupt they have become. 

[jonnyutah 122]

35 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

First off the people we will be helping are refugees, not undocumented immigrants. And they’re families. They’re not criminals. Most undocumented immigrants aren’t either for that matter. 
 

Second, I have a few friends. You could be my friend. I’m a friendly guy. 

Lies. 

[seafoam1 1,879]

36 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

First off the people we will be helping are refugees, not undocumented immigrants. And they’re families. They’re not criminals. Most undocumented immigrants aren’t either for that matter. 
 

Illegals. And they should be treated as such. And I'll do my part to make sure that happens. 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

Hey @Jon_mx your theory that the federal government tried to interfere with social media is being met with major skepticism by the Supreme Court- Kavanaugh and Barrett in particular. I don’t think the challenge is going anywhere. 

[jonmx 1,593]

8 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Hey @Jon_mx your theory that the federal government tried to interfere with social media is being met with major skepticism by the Supreme Court- Kavanaugh and Barrett in particular. I don’t think the challenge is going anywhere. 

I don't think the oral arguments in case went well and both sides seemed confused at what they wanted. They seemed to be stuck on the health care aspect where the government has a case for a compelling interest.  They did a poor job of showing government coercion.  I doubt if it is really a win for either side, as I expect them to come up with a test that neither side will be happy with.  I hope they do put together a solid majority supporting free speech though.   Empowering the government to suppress "misinformstion" is not a government you want to live under..

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

19 minutes ago, jonmx said:

I don't think the oral arguments in case went well and both sides seemed confused at what they wanted. They seemed to be stuck on the health care aspect where the government has a case for a compelling interest.  They did a poor job of showing government coercion.  I doubt if it is really a win for either side, as I expect them to come up with a test that neither side will be happy with.  I hope they do put together a solid majority supporting free speech though.   Empowering the government to suppress "misinformstion" is not a government you want to live under..

It’s not. But you have continually used the supposed example of the government suppressing social media as your justification for comparing our government to Nazi Germany and conservatives to Jews. Hopefully you will come to realize what a grotesque and offensive comparison this is. 

[jonmx 1,593]

23 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s not. But you have continually used the supposed example of the government suppressing social media as your justification for comparing our government to Nazi Germany and conservatives to Jews. Hopefully you will come to realize what a grotesque and offensive comparison this is. 

Because it is.  Big Tech hires a boatload of 'ex'-intelligence officials who make sure big tech companies censor information in a way which uniformly censors speech across the major platforms to promote corrupt elitist authoritarian rule.  Much of the government censorship is done covertly because it is ilegal.

[Strike 3,979]

@The Real timschochet  What do you think about the AP trying to interfere in an election primary by publishing a factually incorrect hit piece on a Trump endorsed candidate just before the primary?  Seems kind of shady don't you think?  Not something a reputable news organization would do.

[iam90sbaby 2,125]

Great job giving this nerd a safe space at the Geek Club guys well done 

[iam90sbaby 2,125]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

@The Real timschochet  What do you think about the AP trying to interfere in an election primary by publishing a factually incorrect hit piece on a Trump endorsed candidate just before the primary?  Seems kind of shady don't you think?  Not something a reputable news organization would do.

Are you dumb?

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

12 minutes ago, Strike said:

@The Real timschochet  What do you think about the AP trying to interfere in an election primary by publishing a factually incorrect hit piece on a Trump endorsed candidate just before the primary?  Seems kind of shady don't you think?  Not something a reputable news organization would do.

I have no idea what this is about. Care to provide a link? I regard Associated Press as reliable a news source as there is. But I’d like to read whatever you’re referring to. 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

9 minutes ago, iam90sbaby said:

Great job giving this nerd a safe space at the Geek Club guys well done 

lol why do you think this is a safe space? Very few people who post in this thread agree with me about anything. I’ve probably received more insults within this thread than I have before I started it. What exactly is safe about it? 

[Strike 3,979]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

lol why do you think this is a safe space? Very few people who post in this thread agree with me about anything. I’ve probably received more insults within this thread than I have before I started it. What exactly is safe about it? 

No, I won't provide you with a link.  The only sites reporting the issue accurately are ones you won't believe, and you don't have the intelligence to see through the spin that the AP and other sites are putting on this story.  So, you can wallow in your ignorance.  Very typical Tim.

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

Just now, Strike said:

No, I won't provide you with a link.  The only sites reporting the issue accurately are ones you won't believe, and you don't have the intelligence to see through the spin that the AP and other sites are putting on this story.  So, you can wallow in your ignorance.  Very typical Tim.

Can you at least point to what site you’re referring to? I don’t even know where to look for this story. How can I judge whether it is fair or not? 

[Strike 3,979]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Can you at least point to what site you’re referring to? I don’t even know where to look for this story. How can I judge whether it is fair or not? 

It's related to a false report by the AP trying to suggest that a candidate named Bernie Moreno had an account on Adult Friend Finder in 2008.  Here is a story from a site you like about the issue:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/03/ohio-senate-race-bernie-moreno-adult-friend-finder-explained.html

However, this story is several days old and omits new information, specifically that the AP claimed in TWO separate stories to have confirmed where the account was created using "geolocation data."    That statement is factually incorrect and is likely to result in a lawsuit.  They published this story a few days before the primary.  The Dems are rolling with it but no other media is.  Which was the intent.  And it's likely to result in a lawsuit.  So, given that info, what do you think of the AP's antics? 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

15 minutes ago, Strike said:

It's related to a false report by the AP trying to suggest that a candidate named Bernie Moreno had an account on Adult Friend Finder in 2008.  Here is a story from a site you like about the issue:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/03/ohio-senate-race-bernie-moreno-adult-friend-finder-explained.html

However, this story is several days old and omits new information, specifically that the AP claimed in TWO separate stories to have confirmed where the account was created using "geolocation data."    That statement is factually incorrect and is likely to result in a lawsuit.  They published this story a few days before the primary.  The Dems are rolling with it but no other media is.  Which was the intent.  And it's likely to result in a lawsuit.  So, given that info, what do you think of the AP's antics? 

Well first off you’re aware that the Democrats want Moreno to win the primary right? Just as in 2022, they are pouring money into the most “MAGA” candidates, including Bernie Moreno, because they believe they have a better chance of beating them in the fall. (FWIW I hate this strategy, I think it’s awful, even though it’s worked in the past to elect Dems. But I still hate it.) My point- if this was some kind of conspiracy by liberals against Moreno it would have surfaced AFTER the primary, not before. 

Second- this is a slimy story. I don’t really want to read about it. I don’t care about it. I don’t believe the AP gets things deliberately wrong. If they got it wrong they deserve to pay a price for that. If your overall premise is that the mainstream media cannot be trusted and will do anything it can to smear conservatives (which most conservatives seem to believe) then you know already I completely reject that premise. 

Bernie Moreno is a guy that I never heard of until a few days ago- I don’t follow Ohio politics. From what I know of his character I respect the fact that he came here from Columbia and has done well for himself- good for him. As you know I love immigrants. That being said from what I’ve read of his views I strongly disagree with him and I hope he loses the primary. (Is that tomorrow?) I don’t care that another candidate will have a better chance to defeat Brown. I want establishment GOP candidates to start winning again. That doesn’t seem likely. 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

Here’s the AP story in question: 

https://apnews.com/article/ohio-senate-election-2024-bernie-moreno-09e34f6331708c192c89d7c1727c2458

Sleazy story and it’s not the sort I have any interest in reading normally. But I’m not sure how AP lied. They present his denials and report that they can’t confirm. Then again you wrote there were two stories so I might be missing one. 

[Strike 3,979]

10 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Here’s the AP story in question: 

https://apnews.com/article/ohio-senate-election-2024-bernie-moreno-09e34f6331708c192c89d7c1727c2458

Sleazy story and it’s not the sort I have any interest in reading normally. But I’m not sure how AP lied. They present his denials and report that they can’t confirm. Then again you wrote there were two stories so I might be missing one. 

I told you SPECIFICALLY how they lied.  The following statement from their article is FACTUALLY incorrect:

 

Quote

Beyond the work email, the profile lists Moreno’s correct date of birth, while geolocation data indicates that the account was set up for use in a part of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, where property records show Moreno’s parents owned a home at the time

There is no geolocation data.  They know this.  They acknowledged it over the weekend.  And they're probably going to get sued over it.

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

16 minutes ago, Strike said:

I told you SPECIFICALLY how they lied.  The following statement from their article is FACTUALLY incorrect:

 

There is no geolocation data.  They know this.  They acknowledged it over the weekend.  And they're probably going to get sued over it.

If they knew it and they lied then they deserve to be sued, and lose. 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

@HellToupee you and @supermike80 have been spreading falsehoods about me in another thread and I have to call you out on it. Supermike wrote that I was one of 3 people who constantly reported other posters at FBG, and you responded “100% true.” It’s not.

I can’t speak for the other two guys; I have no idea who they reported and how often. But I personally never reported more than a handful of times. Maybe 8-10 times at most during my entire time at FBG. Even those I regret in retrospect; if I had the chance to do it over I never would have reported anyone. It was childish of me, though I thought I had good reasons at the time. 
 

But I was certainly never part of any group constantly reporting other people at the drop of a hat and flooding the moderators. That never happened. 

[Gepetto 988]

5 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

lol why do you think this is a safe space? Very few people who post in this thread agree with me about anything. I’ve probably received more insults within this thread than I have before I started it. What exactly is safe about it? 

I think his main point is that he feels it's good to have all your posts in one thread away from all other threads here.

[BrahmaBulls 269]

12 hours ago, squistion said:

Exactly. That's why he responds to me too. And he can't help himself. 

Nope I point out how big of a troll a-hole you are.  

[supermike80 1,287]

11 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

@HellToupee you and @supermike80 have been spreading falsehoods about me in another thread and I have to call you out on it. Supermike wrote that I was one of 3 people who constantly reported other posters at FBG, and you responded “100% true.” It’s not.

I can’t speak for the other two guys; I have no idea who they reported and how often. But I personally never reported more than a handful of times. Maybe 8-10 times at most during my entire time at FBG. Even those I regret in retrospect; if I had the chance to do it over I never would have reported anyone. It was childish of me, though I thought I had good reasons at the time. 
 

But I was certainly never part of any group constantly reporting other people at the drop of a hat and flooding the moderators. That never happened. 

Slight problem with this post, you have been documented many times to be dishonest.   So this can't really be believed.

[squistion 898]

 

[Strike 3,979]

11 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

@HellToupee you and @supermike80 have been spreading falsehoods about me in another thread and I have to call you out on it. Supermike wrote that I was one of 3 people who constantly reported other posters at FBG, and you responded “100% true.” It’s not.

I can’t speak for the other two guys; I have no idea who they reported and how often. But I personally never reported more than a handful of times. Maybe 8-10 times at most during my entire time at FBG. Even those I regret in retrospect; if I had the chance to do it over I never would have reported anyone. It was childish of me, though I thought I had good reasons at the time. 
 

But I was certainly never part of any group constantly reporting other people at the drop of a hat and flooding the moderators. That never happened. 

I don't believe you.  You aren't even honest when I ask you how many times you were suspended over there.  Your truth changes with the wind.

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

I don't believe you.  You aren't even honest when I ask you how many times you were suspended over there.  Your truth changes with the wind.

You also don’t believe that Trump incites violence. You’re wrong most of the time, 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

2 hours ago, supermike80 said:

Slight problem with this post, you have been documented many times to be dishonest.   So this can't really be believed.

You also don’t believe that there is any science to polling. You’re wrong most of the time. 
 

Both you and @Strike will have to take my word on this. Or not. I think that, in both your cases, if you did ever believe something I wrote it would cause me to question myself. 

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

A lot of libs are taking glee in the fact that Trump will have to cough up 450 million and can’t do it, and may be forced to sell some property. 
 

Me, I’m troubled. First off I’m not sure about this entire legal decision. I’m not with @Jon_mx or @Strike that the whole thing is bogus, and I’m certainly not with those who believe this is all part of a scheme to keep Trump from winning the election. But I’m also not sure that he deserves the large penalty he has received. Suppose the appeals court modifies it and says that Trump only owes $50 million or $100 million? Many legal experts think that may happen. If so, then forcing him to sell properties to meet the bond amount, at forced fire sale prices with harsh tax implications seems totally unfair to me. Which is why I’m troubled. 

Politically this could also backfire, but of that I’m pretty skeptical. Whenever Trump is perceived as being treated unfairly I always read somebody who says “I was neutral before but now I’m all in for Trump because I can’t believe the way they’re treating him.” 99% of people who write this stuff were always going to vote for him, so I take it with a grain of salt. Still it might affect a few people the wrong way (for me that is.) 

[Maximum Overkill 646]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

You also don’t believe that there is any science to polling

Ask Hillary Clinton when she was projected to smoke Trump in 2016. 

And then she claimed it was a rigged election, good times 

[jonnyutah 122]

Jose Barrera

[jonmx 1,593]

19 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

A lot of libs are taking glee in the fact that Trump will have to cough up 450 million and can’t do it, and may be forced to sell some property. 
 

Me, I’m troubled. First off I’m not sure about this entire legal decision. I’m not with @Jon_mx or @Strike that the whole thing is bogus,

You keep saying this, but you never answered the question.  If you had a client who valued his house and had an appraisal for $5 million and put that on a financial statement (which contains numerous disclaimers and is not signed under penalty of perjury) and then gets a loan which he pays off with no issues....would it be right for the state to find him guilty of fraud because according to the tax assessor the property was only worth $1 million, and then fine him $2 million?  You do no think that is a completely bogus and unjust case?  Just answer that simple question.  

[The Real timschochet 2,948]

52 minutes ago, jonmx said:

You keep saying this, but you never answered the question.  If you had a client who valued his house and had an appraisal for $5 million and put that on a financial statement (which contains numerous disclaimers and is not signed under penalty of perjury) and then gets a loan which he pays off with no issues....would it be right for the state to find him guilty of fraud because according to the tax assessor the property was only worth $1 million, and then fine him $2 million?  You do no think that is a completely bogus and unjust case?  Just answer that simple question.  

No of course not. 
 

But let’s suppose there was no appraisal, and the house, which was estimated by most people to be between 2-5 million, was claimed to be 30 million? Wouldn’t that be fraud? And shouldn’t there be some kind of penalty? How much I don’t know. 

[jonmx 1,593]

25 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

No of course not. 
 

But let’s suppose there was no appraisal, and the house, which was estimated by most people to be between 2-5 million, was claimed to be 30 million? Wouldn’t that be fraud? And shouldn’t there be some kind of penalty? How much I don’t know. 

That is not what happened.  Appraisers appraised the value around what Trump said.  The judge relied on no appraisal, but valued it based on a tax assessment, which the state of Florida acknowledged was extremely low.  Why not based the scenario on the facts of the case instead of some made up BS.