American heroes: CDC senior officials who resigned

[TimHauck 3,034]

15 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

So Bloomberg is lying?

I swear.   Between you and ron, I cant figure out who has the worst TDS

Cook, though, is seeking to block the move, filing a lawsuit in federal court on Thursday that labeled the president’s bid to oust her as “illegal” and casting it as a bid to seize control of the Fed. Her lawyers have also suggested that an unintentional “clerical error” may be behind the mortgage disputes in Pulte’s first criminal referral. The Department of Justice has already signaled plans to investigate Cook over the earlier referral.

Yes, although words the words “suggesting” and “‘may be” are doing a lot of work there. In fact the word “clerical” is not even in the sentence they’re getting that from, and the rest of the sentence is not close to an admission.

9 minutes ago, Strike said:

You understand that when her lawyers put something in a court pleasing that they are speaking for their client, don't you?

Yes.  But I’d suggest you read the actual lawsuit and not depend on the MSM.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,588]

So she belonged to the same sorority as the judge that caught her case ? Doesn’t even have the class to recuse herself. 

[jonnyutah 356]

24 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So she belonged to the same sorority as the judge that caught her case ? Doesn’t even have the class to recuse herself. 

Like that even matters. The judge is a black woman democrat. The most tribal population set ever. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,588]

9 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

Like that even matters. The judge is a black woman democrat. The most tribal population set ever. 

Good point. 

[jonnyutah 356]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Good point. 

They are so tribal they actually brag about it. People reference them as being heroic for their extreme political tribalism. 

It is pathetic. 

[TimHauck 3,034]

So if she loses, she deserves to.

If she wins, corrupt judge.

 

[TimHauck 3,034]

Former federal prosecutor that defended J6’ers and is trashing Cook’s arguments, says the judge is “quite good” btw.

 

[The Real timschochet 7,043]

Trump always gives it away. On Tuesday morning he said at the Cabinet meeting: 

“We’ll have a majority (in the Fed)  very shortly. Once we have a majority housing is going to swing.” Then he fired Cook a day later. 
 

You guys can argue it’s a legit firing but it’s bullsh!t and you know it. 

 

[supermike80 1,985]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

Trump always gives it away. On Tuesday morning he said at the Cabinet meeting: 

“We’ll have a majority (in the Fed)  very shortly. Once we have a majority housing is going to swing.” Then he fired Cook a day later. 
 

You guys can argue it’s a legit firing but it’s bullsh!t and you know it. 

 

Guess she shoudn't have committed mortgage fraud.   

[The Real timschochet 7,043]

Just now, supermike80 said:

Guess she shoudn't have committed mortgage fraud.   

It’s not clear she did. And that’s the problem. 

[Strike 5,754]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Trump always gives it away. On Tuesday morning he said at the Cabinet meeting: 

“We’ll have a majority (in the Fed)  very shortly. Once we have a majority housing is going to swing.” Then he fired Cook a day later. 
 

You guys can argue it’s a legit firing but it’s bullsh!t and you know it. 

 

It can be legit and good for Trump's agenda at the same time.   HTH 

[Strike 5,754]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

It’s not clear she did. And that’s the problem. 

It literally is.  You can keep denying it but the documents don't lie 

[The Real timschochet 7,043]

Just now, Strike said:

It literally is.  You can keep denying it but the documents don't lie 

I don’t think your argument will prevail in court. Let’s find out. 

[supermike80 1,985]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t think your argument will prevail in court. Let’s find out. 

So let's assume....The court rules Trump cannot fire her unless the allegations are proven. If it is proven she did commit mortgage fraud is it Ok to fire her then?  and will she still be a hero to you?

[jonnyutah 356]

20 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

So let's assume....The court rules Trump cannot fire her unless the allegations are proven. If it is proven she did commit mortgage fraud is it Ok to fire her then?  and will she still be a hero to you?

They wont rule that because they werent asked to rule on that. 

 

[supermike80 1,985]

14 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

They wont rule that because they werent asked to rule on that. 

 

Ok.   Let me restate.  If she is found to have committed mortgage fraud, should she be fired?   Will she be one of Tim's heroes as well?

[Meglamaniac 645]

46 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Trump always gives it away. On Tuesday morning he said at the Cabinet meeting: 

“We’ll have a majority (in the Fed)  very shortly. Once we have a majority housing is going to swing.” Then he fired Cook a day later. 
 

You guys can argue it’s a legit firing but it’s bullsh!t and you know it. 

 

no its not

[The Real timschochet 7,043]

35 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

So let's assume....The court rules Trump cannot fire her unless the allegations are proven. If it is proven she did commit mortgage fraud is it Ok to fire her then?  and will she still be a hero to you?

To your first question I don’t know. It seems like a pretty minor crime and it was done before she came in. So I’m honestly not sure. Maybe. Best answer I can give. 
 

To your second question yes. It seems clear to me that Donald Trump is all about testing the limits of his executive power and attempting to impose a dictatorship on this country. Anyone who resists that is a hero to me. 

[TimHauck 3,034]

43 minutes ago, Strike said:

It literally is.  You can keep denying it but the documents don't lie 

Have you read her lawsuit yet?  It doesn’t say what you think it does.  
 

HTH

[Meglamaniac 645]

42 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t think your argument will prevail in court. Let’s find out. 

this is great news as you are always wrong

Might as well convict her now

[supermike80 1,985]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

To your first question I don’t know. It seems like a pretty minor crime and it was done before she came in. So I’m honestly not sure. Maybe. Best answer I can give. 
 

To your second question yes. It seems clear to me that Donald Trump is all about testing the limits of his executive power and attempting to impose a dictatorship on this country. Anyone who resists that is a hero to me. 

This "done before she came in" deflection is absurd.   That needs to stop.  

[The Real timschochet 7,043]

Just now, supermike80 said:

This "done before she came in" deflection is absurd.   That needs to stop.  

It’s not a deflection to me. In this instance it strikes me a legitimate argument because irs pretty clear to me that Trump went cherry picking to find a crime here. 

[TimHauck 3,034]

1 minute ago, supermike80 said:

This "done before she came in" deflection is absurd.   That needs to stop.  

Agree

[Strike 5,754]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

Have you read her lawsuit yet?  It doesn’t say what you think it does.  
 

HTH

Yes I have.  This is where the critical thinking I post a lot about comes in, and since that is a skill missing from your skill set I'm not surprised you don't get it.  

[Strike 5,754]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s not a deflection to me. In this instance it strikes me a legitimate argument because irs pretty clear to me that Trump went cherry picking to find a crime here. 

Like Leticia James?  

[TimHauck 3,034]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

Yes I have.  This is where the critical thinking I post a lot about comes in, and since that is a skill missing from your skill set I'm not surprised you don't get it.  

^ Not a serious poster if that’s your conclusion from reading the actual lawsuit

[supermike80 1,985]

8 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

It’s not a deflection to me. In this instance it strikes me a legitimate argument because irs pretty clear to me that Trump went cherry picking to find a crime here. 

So it's not about whether she broke the law, its about Trump.

THAT is TDS Sir.

[jonnyutah 356]

15 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Ok.   Let me restate.  If she is found to have committed mortgage fraud, should she be fired?   Will she be one of Tim's heroes as well?

She doesnt have to be found to have committed fraud.

Gross incompetence of the subject is enough. That is why she is gone eventually. You cant win with the  "she is just a moron" defense. 

[TimHauck 3,034]

5 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

She doesnt have to be found to have committed fraud.

Gross incompetence of the subject is enough. That is why she is gone eventually. You cant win with the  "she is just a moron" defense. 

Cool, good thing she hasn’t offered that defense (at least not yet)

[jerryskids 6,932]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Trump always gives it away. On Tuesday morning he said at the Cabinet meeting: 

“We’ll have a majority (in the Fed)  very shortly. Once we have a majority housing is going to swing.” Then he fired Cook a day later. 
 

You guys can argue it’s a legit firing but it’s bullsh!t and you know it. 

 

Occam's Razor says he knew about the mortgage fraud Cook committed at the Cabinet meeting.  Unless you are proposing that he said it, then sent his good squad to furiously find something, and within 24 hours they found this.   

[jonnyutah 356]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Cool, good thing she hasn’t offered that defense (at least not yet)

Right. She hasnt offered any defense yet.

I already mentioned that like 88 times. She has yet to deny the allegations.

 

[TimHauck 3,034]

13 hours ago, jonnyutah said:

Right. She hasnt offered any defense yet.

I already mentioned that like 88 times. She has yet to deny the allegations.

 

Better tell that to Strike and @supermike80 who think she used an excuse of a clerical error:

For those that haven’t read the lawsuit, here is the phrase that is based on:

”the President’s concocted basis for removal—the unsubstantiated and unproven allegation that Governor Cook ‘potentially” erred in filling out a mortgage form prior to her Senate confirmation—does not amount to cause”

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/26078055/cooktrumpcomp082825.pdf

And here is the admin response - notably they focus on the argument that simply an allegation is enough to show cause.  I thought this phrase was interesting: “evidence of deceitful and potentially criminal conduct—plainly constitute cause.”  If everyone in government got fired for “deceitful conduct” (of which it’s not even confirmed this is), there would be no one left.

It also specifically states that the mortgages said she only needed to occupy the properties as her principal residence for 1 year (which I noted earlier in a previous post that you replied “nope” to).

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.284270/gov.uscourts.dcd.284270.13.0_1.pdf

[jonnyutah 356]

19 hours ago, jonnyutah said:

20 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Pretty sure the legal definition of primary residence generally means 183 days a year.  Both residences could have technically been her primary residence for the first year of owning them, which is generally the only relevant timeframe.  Even the Zillow listing that Pulte used as his “evidence” was from more than a year after it was purchased.

Nope. 

Bump

[TimHauck 3,034]

9 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

Bump

My last sentence there was always 100% correct.

One year being the relevant timeframe for the mortgage has now been confirmed by Trump’s admin.

Do you dispute either of those statements?  If so, you’re wrong.

The only thing that’s in question about my above post is the definition of primary residence, as I believe that can vary by state.

 

[jonnyutah 356]

22 hours ago, jonnyutah said:

23 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Pretty sure the legal definition of primary residence generally means 183 days a year.  Both residences could have technically been her primary residence for the first year of owning them, which is generally the only relevant timeframe.  Even the Zillow listing that Pulte used as his “evidence” was from more than a year after it was purchased.

Nope. 

Bump

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,258]

Now a THIRD mortgage fraud referred to DOJ for her SECOND criminal referral:

https://nypost.com/2025/08/29/us-news/federal-reserve-gov-lisa-cook-hit-with-2nd-criminal-referral-from-trump-housing-director/

KarenHauck is going to have to go into overdrive with his excuses, smoke screens and distractions to cover this one up. 

I'm sure lastWordGuiy (aka theGeneralRetard) will be in shortly to also run cover with his unwitty drive-by quips.

[TimHauck 3,034]

2 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Now a THIRD mortgage fraud referred to DOJ: 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-29/pulte-ups-cook-scrutiny-with-criminal-referral-on-third-mortgage

KarenHauck is going to have to go into overdrive with his excuses, smoke screens and distractions to cover this one up. 

I'm sure lastWordGuiy (aka theGeneralRetard) will also be in to also run cover with his unwitty drive-by quips.

Did they refer it on the moon?

Already been discussed, she called this one a second home, so not as bad as Texas AG Ken Paxton with 3 primary residences.  Second homes can legally be rented out.

Good try, good effort though. 

[WhiteWonder 2,837]

i wonder if OP knew anything about her, this great american hero, 6 months ago... 

[iam90sbaby 2,659]

Shoutout David Duke 

[Ron_Artest 1,743]

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/ken-angela-paxton-mortgage-primary-residence-homestead-exemption/

Not a word from Republicans.