Michael Scarn

Take all the love you have for her, Pablo, and give it freely to all that you meet. Your mom will look down upon you, happy and proud. twitter.com/pablonikolaz/s…

Socialist Zohran Mamdani’s wife Rama Duwaji appears to wear luxury $630 boots to swearing in ceremony trib.al/rbsYcH9

@GovPressOffice @SpeakerJohnson And y’all have said nothing about the comments Jay Jones made… so….

@Christo62230432 @Timcast So not trying isnt an L but trying is an L. Got it

@smithchadwick You’re such a loser

First, he just made $4B. Second, it's actually unconstitutional to demand a large payment as a condition for having your right to due process (I would sue for that and demand an injunction on the $355M payment pending a ruling). Finally, there was no crime... This is a COMPLETE bullshit case by a partisan judge brought by a political hack prosecutor (YOU @NewYorkStateAG). Yes, I DID read the ENTIRE DISPOSITION. It is NOT a final ruling folks. Read the damned thing, not that most of you can understand it. nytimes.com/interactive/20… Here's the summary from someone that has been through similar things, including a REAL WORLD EXAMPLE showing WHY this is bullshit. The example first. I was involved in a property purchase years ago. It involved loans from the government - local , state, and federal government loans. I was a party to the buyers so I had a strong interest in what I was getting for my money. I happen to have family in the escrow business and as it turns out the owner of the escrow company handling the purchase was a friend. So, I had inside knowledge of the entire thing. The property was appraised at $5M, but the owner was valuing it at $7M. The loans were based on the $7M the OWNER valued the property at. Do the math and that is over 28.6% ABOVE the appraised market value of the property. All the financial statements, etc. from the property owner showed the $7M value, NOT the $5M market value. THIS WAS AND IS ALL PERFECTLY LEGAL. Until Trump. Now for the disposition (ruling). The entire case is based on the premise that it is illegal or fraudulent for a property owner to put a value of their choosing on property THEY OWN. This is a complete lie. Hell my house (just purchased) was up for sale at a price about 20% over market value, but that was NOT ILLEGAL. If I were to ask for a loan using my house (given that I own it) as collateral, THEN the bank would care what the market value is, AND they would approve IN THE LOAN CONTRACT the method by which that value is determined. They would loan the money based on that valuation. If that valuation is determined BY THE BANK and the SELLER to be legitimate, then the loan is given. THIS IS LEGAL AND NOT FRAUDULENT. The prosecutor alleged that because Trump valued one particular property between ~17%-~39% over market value, he committed fraud. Again, this is a complete lie. It alleges that because Trump greatly inflated the value of his apartment above the values of other apartments of the same size in the area, he committed fraud. Again, a complete lie. It never mentions the value of anything IN the apartment. We've all seen pictures of the interior, we know what building it's located in, and we DON'T know the terms of the LOAN CONTRACTS for the loans. We also don't know how the banks valued the properties and determined TRUMP'S ABILITY TO PAY the loans back. The "worthless" clause as the disposition coined it, says EXACTLY what Trump said it does. Trump called it the "worthless clause" because every lender does EXACTLY what the clause tells them to do - don't believe what the borrower is telling you, investigate and find out for yourself. That's why the clause is worthless, but it IS in the contract, and it WAS SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES, making it legally binding. The disposition plays word games just because the would "could" is used and the word "future" is not. Everyone that understands plain English knows that "could", in the context in which it is used in the clause, implies "future". Again, the disposition is completely false. In short, the entire case that was decided - but was NOT A FINAL DECISION - is based on nothing criminal or fraudulent. The ruling goes through a ton of justification for the decision, which is based on the NY Executive Law 63(12) that Trump continually "...engage[d] in repeated fraudulent...acts...". It then tries to state that the valuations of his properties were fraudulent even though it is the norm that property owners inflate their value and ability to pay when they apply for loans. The thing is, the judge and prosecutor DON'T CARE about the law, and neither do Trump haters. They ONLY care about getting Trump - and anyone like him - out of the way of the liberal machine. They know they will most likely lose on appeal or eventually in the Supreme Court, but by then - years from now - the 2024 election will be over and Trump will no longer be a threat. Anyone that can't see this is a COMPLETE fool or a liar taking part in destroying America.

@IlliniJen Why is the head of the DMV talking about food? Maybe he should focus on shorter lines at the license centers.