Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You mean people of color? They are sometimes discriminated against. I wouldn’t go so far as to use the word oppressed.
Me? I’m a nice looking white guy with all the advantages I could have asked for.
dummy, the problem was not under what entity he owned that property, but the fraudulent way he overvalued it in financial filings while he fought tooth and nail to undervalue it for tax purposes.
Trump used 600 million valuation in one loan filing and yet was fighting a 26 million valuation by the state for tax purposes.
This is not a close call.
A neighbor’s property is 10x smaller and the market estimate is 56 million and that does’t even include the 20 acres that Mar-A-Largo sits on. So, using price per square foot only, NOT including the land, Mar-A-Largo would be $560 million. That also doesn’t account for the historical value of Mar-A-Largo.
www.wptv.com
I'm glad you finally admitted it, they are very rarely discriminated against, I will remind you of your admission next time I see you screaming discrimination. You seem to have an unusually high concern for it given you're a 'white guy'.
You may want to read up on real estate tax law before saying nonsense like that.the two have nothing to do with each other
why did you edit my comment to fit your narrative??You may want to read up on real estate tax law before saying nonsense like that.
Did you or did you not clearly say that market valuation of real estate has nothing to do with real estate taxation?why did you edit my comment to fit your narrative??
why did you edit my comment to fit your narrative??Did you or did you not clearly say that market valuation of real estate has nothing to do with real estate taxation?
I've quoted your statement that real estate market value has nothing to do with taxation.why did you edit my comment to fit your narrative??
you edited my comment to fit your narrative,,I've quoted your statement that real estate market value has nothing to do with taxation.
You don't refute thats what you've said, but insist I misquoted you, which brings about a question:
Are you completely nuts?
you edited my comment to fit your narrative,,
if youre going to play silly games like that you can go suck a cock or post my full comment in context,,
you didnt misquote me,, you edited my comment to fit your narrative,,So I misquoted you, but you don't refute it's exactly what you've said. Who do you think can keep up with your crazy bs?
Take your complaints to mods, see what happens.
But they did cover the impeachment inquiry.
Oops. Embarrassing.
You are claiming “treason” which is beyond absurd and demonstrates you aren’t really a serious person. Not to mention the Republican witnesses can’t even claim that there’s sufficient evidence to support any actual offenses (certainly not treason). And we are arguing actual offenses before a judge and winning based on facts and evidence.
It was a six hour long hearing with no new information. I’m not really all that certain what the point of the hearing was.I was talking about showing the hearings on TV, you know, like they did with all the Trump hearings and like they will do with any of the GA hearings, if allowed.
It was a six hour long hearing with no new information. I’m not really all that certain what the point of the hearing was.
Putting it live on TV would be a little silly.
But thanks for acknowledging that you’re moving the goal posts.
But there was no new information, just rehashing stuff they’d already released and talked about. I wouldn’t put a 6 hour long repeat on TV. That would be silly.You are not sure what the point of the hearing was? Yeah, I don’t know, to track the roots of the 1/4 billion dollars that was funneled into the Biden family? The circumstantial evidence is OVERWHELMING in this case. Given the evidence to date, if Biden was a normal Joe, instead of Presdident Joe, he would be easily convicted by a judge or a jury.
But there was no new information, just rehashing stuff they’d already released and talked about. I wouldn’t put a 6 hour long repeat on TV. That would be silly.
If the circumstantial evidence is so overwhelming, you should have testified instead of the forensic accountant who said there was no crime.
Crazy how you are so much smarter than him.
He didn’t disqualify anything. He did disagree with your assessment as to whether the evidence showed a crime.The forensic accountant in no way disqualified the tons of circumstantial evidence. He merely could not provide the smoking gun. What I don’t understand is why people like you defend the obvious. I know he is your guy and you hate Trump, but you are not being honest with yourself. If this amount of evidence was shown against Trump and his son while he was if office, he would have already been impeached and you would have been onboard with it.
He didn’t disqualify anything. He did disagree with your assessment as to whether the evidence showed a crime.
Loading…
www.axios.com
I guess it’s only obvious to people like yourself who are deeply partisan and need to believe things which aren’t actually true.
Actually, Dubinsky’s opening statement said they much more evidence needs to be gathered before he could even suggest there were corruption, fraud or wrong doing.Maybe you don’t get it. Maybe you don’t know what circumstantial evidence means. Maybe you don’t recognize that fact that people are convicted everyday on circumstantial evidence. Not that it will matter to people like you, but more will come out.
The only thing got from the very biased article you linked was that according the the accountant, “much more information needs to be gathered“. That would be true to unequivocally prove that Joe committed a crime. He is referring to a smoking gun. That is not the legal requirement for conviction, and a thank goodness for that. Imagine how many criminals would be walking the street if that were the case.
Regardless, more and more circumstantial evidence will come to light and you will continue to say it doesn’t matter unless they find a smoking gun. Frankly, even if found, the left will have an excuse for that as well.
