The left gets to define the terms for their purposes.

Awww, would it make you feel better if I called him a douche bag who built an empire around the unethical practice of separating people from their hard earned money by giving them 20% interest on a [BLEEP] car loan because they have a 599 credit score? 

Hell of a lot [BLEEP] easier to say loan shark, numbnutz.

---

If anyone is curious about who holds the note on this:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-hankey-ci...ny-1885832

Mr. Hankey has bailed Trump out of financial trouble in the past with 125 and 175 million dollar loans so Trump could retain 2 different properties he could no longer afford.  Trump still owes him on those loans/refis.

Add this Bond to the tab and Trump is basically financially owned by a dude who makes his millions giving 15% interest car loans to people with bad credit.

President Trump does not owe a "loan shark" money for his bond.  According to what I have read about this, the bond was made by an insurance company (owned by Mr. Hankey) AFTER President Trump put up the collateral for it.  President Trump is essentially going to have to pay a couple-million dollars in order to service the debt.

Appeal bonds are used when a defendant appeals a court ruling, which essentially freezes enforcement of the financial judgment as the legal process continues.

Insurers typically provide the bond after they have proof of collateral and charge a fee, which ranges from 1% to 2% of the bond amount, according to insurance broker NFP. That means Trump could be paying as much as $3.5 million on an annual basis for the bond guarantee from Knight Insurance.

If Trump wins his appeal of the ruling, he won't have to pay the state anything and will get his money back.

The "loan shark" that you hate so much employs thousands of people and provides (among other things) sub-prime auto loans to people with bad credit.

Yeah! Heidi Fleiss employed hundreds of women! How could anyone look down on her!

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Yeah! Heidi Fleiss employed hundreds of women! How could anyone look down on her!

Speaking of this, did she ever pay your Mom and Sister? BUUUHHWWWAAAAAA!!

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

The left gets to define the terms for their purposes.

Awww, would it make you feel better if I called him a douche bag who built an empire around the unethical practice of separating people from their hard earned money by giving them 20% interest on a [BLEEP] car loan because they have a 599 credit score? 

Hell of a lot [BLEEP] easier to say loan shark, numbnutz.

So, you're saying that hyperbole is a great substitute for intellectual integrity. As long as it's the correct political opinion. Sounds great.

---

If anyone is curious about who holds the note on this:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-hankey-ci...ny-1885832

Mr. Hankey has bailed Trump out of financial trouble in the past with 125 and 175 million dollar loans so Trump could retain 2 different properties he could no longer afford.  Trump still owes him on those loans/refis.

Add this Bond to the tab and Trump is basically financially owned by a dude who makes his millions giving 15% interest car loans to people with bad credit.

President Trump does not owe a "loan shark" money for his bond.  According to what I have read about this, the bond was made by an insurance company (owned by Mr. Hankey) AFTER President Trump put up the collateral for it.  President Trump is essentially going to have to pay a couple-million dollars in order to service the debt.

Appeal bonds are used when a defendant appeals a court ruling, which essentially freezes enforcement of the financial judgment as the legal process continues.

Insurers typically provide the bond after they have proof of collateral and charge a fee, which ranges from 1% to 2% of the bond amount, according to insurance broker NFP. That means Trump could be paying as much as $3.5 million on an annual basis for the bond guarantee from Knight Insurance.

If Trump wins his appeal of the ruling, he won't have to pay the state anything and will get his money back.

The "loan shark" that you hate so much employs thousands of people and provides (among other things) sub-prime auto loans to people with bad credit.

Thanks for doing that for me. I was going to look it up when I got home tonight. I don't know much about Mr. Hankey.

---

Yeah! Heidi Fleiss employed hundreds of women! How could anyone look down on her!

Speaking of this, did she ever pay your Mom and Sister? BUUUHHWWWAAAAAA!!

They were always paid upfront. They're smarter than the prostitutes you spend time with.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Awww, would it make you feel better if I called him a douche bag who built an empire around the unethical practice of separating people from their hard earned money by giving them 20% interest on a [BLEEP] car loan because they have a 599 credit score? 

Hell of a lot [BLEEP] easier to say loan shark, numbnutz.

So, you're saying that hyperbole is a great substitute for intellectual integrity. As long as it's the correct political opinion. Sounds great.

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

---

So, you're saying that hyperbole is a great substitute for intellectual integrity. As long as it's the correct political opinion. Sounds great.

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Moderator of the year!

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

So, you're saying that hyperbole is a great substitute for intellectual integrity. As long as it's the correct political opinion. Sounds great.

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Is it legal?

---

---

This is what fully diagnosed TDS looks like.

---

This is what fully diagnosed TDS looks like.

Been watching the breakdown in real time for a while now, taking notes, doing research, swapping theories..

That's Subject 2.. He's not Patient Zero but I think he was exposed early on, maybe in the beta tests..

---

So, you're saying that hyperbole is a great substitute for intellectual integrity. As long as it's the correct political opinion. Sounds great.

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Ah, so intellectually lazy and unhinged. That's a pretty serious combo. I mean, typical, but I mean what other tools do you have in your arsenal? 

Instead of realizing that you are talking about a guy who's never met Trump, who owns an insurance company, who made a calculated investment in Trump's bail (which should make him plenty of money all on its own so long as Trump doesn't flee the country), you instead want to ad hominem the dude and create a strawman to support your contrived position that Trump is the devil because he borrowed money from a guy who got rich selling cars to people with bad credit? That's your end game? You want us arguing about this guy's past and whether he is or isn't a loan shark? Even though he has a legitimate lending business and is a billionaire several times over? That means Trump is automatically going to have to sell out to this dude even though he's likely to get his money back? 

The left sure likes its conspiracy theories.

---

 Btw, how many facts are there in the above post that you will ignore to focus on your ad hominems and conjecture. Lazy posting and TDS. Figured I would invalidate that post by typing those letters so you wouldn't feel the need to respond. Can't have our best mod getting suspended for violating the rules (oh, that's right, you get to ignore them all the time). Any second now Cleatwood should be doing a drive-by to tell you how mean you are....

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Ah, so intellectually lazy and unhinged. That's a pretty serious combo. I mean, typical, but I mean what other tools do you have in your arsenal? 

Instead of realizing that you are talking about a guy who's never met Trump, who owns an insurance company, who made a calculated investment in Trump's bail (which should make him plenty of money all on its own so long as Trump doesn't flee the country), you instead want to ad hominem the dude and create a strawman to support your contrived position that Trump is the devil because he borrowed money from a guy who got rich selling cars to people with bad credit? That's your end game? You want us arguing about this guy's past and whether he is or isn't a loan shark? Even though he has a legitimate lending business and is a billionaire several times over? That means Trump is automatically going to have to sell out to this dude even though he's likely to get his money back? 

The left sure likes its conspiracy theories.

---

 Btw, how many facts are there in the above post that you will ignore to focus on your ad hominems and conjecture. Lazy posting and TDS. Figured I would invalidate that post by typing those letters so you wouldn't feel the need to respond. Can't have our best mod getting suspended for violating the rules (oh, that's right, you get to ignore them all the time). Any second now Cleatwood should be doing a drive-by to tell you how mean you are....

Wow

Yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a politician owing hundreds of millions of dollars to a shady business owner who is also a campaign contributor. There is no way that could ever be a bad thing. I'm sure no favors will ever be called in. No influence will ever be exerted. 

All of your blustering about corruption and big money influence and you are too willfully ignorant to see the glaring red flags in this politically. 

What a hypocrite.

---

This is what fully diagnosed TDS looks like.

Your are what a cultist looks like

Brainwashed sheep led to slaughter.

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Moderator of the year!

It was a pretty good post if I say so myself.

Thanks.

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Is it legal?

Get back to me when you understand the difference between ethical and legal.

---

So, you're saying that hyperbole is a great substitute for intellectual integrity. As long as it's the correct political opinion. Sounds great.

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Regarding the first part in bold of your nonsense, what part of being a sub-prime lender is against the law?  What makes him a "criminal"?

Regarding the second part in bold of your nonsense, why should someone with a low credit score's loan be 5% vs. 20%?  I happen to have an excellent score, and I know if I go to my credit union for a loan I will get a very good interest rate.  In my younger days when my credit score was not-so-good, I could still get a loan from my credit union at a much higher interest rate along with stricter terms.  Does that make my credit union a "loan shark"?  By your logic every rent-to-own business, every "buy here pay here" car lot, every "payday loan" company is a "loan shark".

Finally, if I default on a loan for say an automobile, the lender is going to send it to collections which will indeed be calling me and "harassing" me while threatening repossession.  Once again by your logic that makes just about every financial institution a '"loan shark".

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Ah, so intellectually lazy and unhinged. That's a pretty serious combo. I mean, typical, but I mean what other tools do you have in your arsenal? 

Instead of realizing that you are talking about a guy who's never met Trump, who owns an insurance company, who made a calculated investment in Trump's bail (which should make him plenty of money all on its own so long as Trump doesn't flee the country), you instead want to ad hominem the dude and create a strawman to support your contrived position that Trump is the devil because he borrowed money from a guy who got rich selling cars to people with bad credit? That's your end game? You want us arguing about this guy's past and whether he is or isn't a loan shark? Even though he has a legitimate lending business and is a billionaire several times over? That means Trump is automatically going to have to sell out to this dude even though he's likely to get his money back? 

The left sure likes its conspiracy theories.

---

 Btw, how many facts are there in the above post that you will ignore to focus on your ad hominems and conjecture. Lazy posting and TDS. Figured I would invalidate that post by typing those letters so you wouldn't feel the need to respond. Can't have our best mod getting suspended for violating the rules (oh, that's right, you get to ignore them all the time). Any second now Cleatwood should be doing a drive-by to tell you how mean you are....

Wow

Yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a politician owing hundreds of millions of dollars to a shady business owner who is also a campaign contributor. There is no way that could ever be a bad thing. I'm sure no favors will ever be called in. No influence will ever be exerted. 

All of your blustering about corruption and big money influence and you are too willfully ignorant to see the glaring red flags in this politically. 

What a hypocrite.

---

Wow, your spin cycle is stuck on high.  Again, you fail to realize how this while process really works.

1.  We have already established that the owner of the insurance company handling President Trump's bond is not a "shady" business owner.

2.  The insurance company is handling the bond after President Trump provided the needed collateral.

3.  One of two things will happen after the appeal.  The first is that President Trump loses the case and therefore forfeits the collateral that he gave to the insurance company.  The second is that if President Trump wins the case he gets his collateral back from the insurance company minus a couple of million dollars for a servicing fee (that "loan shark" insurance company).

President Trump does not "owe the legitimate business owner" hundreds of millions of dollars.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Wow

Yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a politician owing hundreds of millions of dollars to a shady business owner who is also a campaign contributor. There is no way that could ever be a bad thing. I'm sure no favors will ever be called in. No influence will ever be exerted. 

All of your blustering about corruption and big money influence and you are too willfully ignorant to see the glaring red flags in this politically. 

What a hypocrite.

---

Wow, your spin cycle is stuck on high.  Again, you fail to realize how this while process really works.

1.  We have already established that the owner of the insurance company handling President Trump's bond is not a "shady" business owner.

2.  The insurance company is handling the bond after President Trump provided the needed collateral.

3.  One of two things will happen after the appeal.  The first is that President Trump loses the case and therefore forfeits the collateral that he gave to the insurance company.  The second is that if President Trump wins the case he gets his collateral back from the insurance company minus a couple of million dollars for a servicing fee (that "loan shark" insurance company).

President Trump does not "owe the legitimate business owner" hundreds of millions of dollars.

Wow 

Your lack of understanding is stuck on high

TRUMP ALREADY OWES HIM 300 million in prior loans to bail out the failing Doral Golf Club and Trump Tower in NYC

These loans have mostly deferred payment that continue until 2031. 

Maybe read the articles I linked on the subject before spouting off

And YES, Hankey is shady as [BLEEP] - and he not only owns the insurance company handling the bond but is the largest shareholder in the bank that backs it PLUS the two other loans Trrump owes him

But, no , there's no way he'd ever hold any sway with the White House.
LOL

---

No, dip [BLEEP] 

I'm calling you a disingenuous prick for trying to protect the rep of a criminal because you don't want to call Hankey  a loan shark - even though he is absolutely a [BLEEP] loan shark 

Having a whole building of enforcers that begin harassing "clients" when they are one day late on their 20% loan that should be 5% - threatening to come claim their assets from them is indeed the equivalent of a loan shark in the modern parlance. 

But why should I be surprised that your mental midgetry required me to break it down like this??

[BLEEP] moron

Regarding the first part in bold of your nonsense, what part of being a sub-prime lender is against the law?  What makes him a "criminal"?

Regarding the second part in bold of your nonsense, why should someone with a low credit score's loan be 5% vs. 20%?  I happen to have an excellent score, and I know if I go to my credit union for a loan I will get a very good interest rate.  In my younger days when my credit score was not-so-good, I could still get a loan from my credit union at a much higher interest rate along with stricter terms.  Does that make my credit union a "loan shark"?  By your logic every rent-to-own business, every "buy here pay here" car lot, every "payday loan" company is a "loan shark".

Finally, if I default on a loan for say an automobile, the lender is going to send it to collections which will indeed be calling me and "harassing" me while threatening repossession.  Once again by your logic that makes just about every financial institution a '"loan shark".

Ethics vs legality again

If you think it's ethical to ripoff bad credit customers with 20% car loans - that's between you and your own lack of morality. 

LOL
Forbes magazine calls the guy a loan shark and you lot want to pile on me for using the same (accurate) term.

---

Ah, so intellectually lazy and unhinged. That's a pretty serious combo. I mean, typical, but I mean what other tools do you have in your arsenal? 

Instead of realizing that you are talking about a guy who's never met Trump, who owns an insurance company, who made a calculated investment in Trump's bail (which should make him plenty of money all on its own so long as Trump doesn't flee the country), you instead want to ad hominem the dude and create a strawman to support your contrived position that Trump is the devil because he borrowed money from a guy who got rich selling cars to people with bad credit? That's your end game? You want us arguing about this guy's past and whether he is or isn't a loan shark? Even though he has a legitimate lending business and is a billionaire several times over? That means Trump is automatically going to have to sell out to this dude even though he's likely to get his money back? 

The left sure likes its conspiracy theories.

---

 Btw, how many facts are there in the above post that you will ignore to focus on your ad hominems and conjecture. Lazy posting and TDS. Figured I would invalidate that post by typing those letters so you wouldn't feel the need to respond. Can't have our best mod getting suspended for violating the rules (oh, that's right, you get to ignore them all the time). Any second now Cleatwood should be doing a drive-by to tell you how mean you are....

Wow

Yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a politician owing hundreds of millions of dollars to a shady business owner who is also a campaign contributor. There is no way that could ever be a bad thing. I'm sure no favors will ever be called in. No influence will ever be exerted. 

All of your blustering about corruption and big money influence and you are too willfully ignorant to see the glaring red flags in this politically. 

What a hypocrite.

---

This is what fully diagnosed TDS looks like.

Your are what a cultist looks like

Brainwashed sheep led to slaughter.

---

Moderator of the year!

It was a pretty good post if I say so myself.

Thanks.

Who's the hypocrite? Literally every single politician is essentially bankrolled by a billionaire. In Hillary's email leaks, she straight up said to give Soros whatever he wants. Ooh... I said Soros, now you can call me a conspiracy theorist instead of addressing the point. You don't think Biden is beholden to his donors? Get the [BLEEP] out of here with your whiney double standard. 

So what? Trump owes a billionaire money. Sure, Trump could end up in his pocket. You don't have proof. It's literally conjecture. It's a giant strawman and you're too haughty and ignorant to admit the truth of it. 

At least you managed to get through a post without LOLing all over yourself.

---

Wow

Yes, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a politician owing hundreds of millions of dollars to a shady business owner who is also a campaign contributor. There is no way that could ever be a bad thing. I'm sure no favors will ever be called in. No influence will ever be exerted. 

All of your blustering about corruption and big money influence and you are too willfully ignorant to see the glaring red flags in this politically. 

What a hypocrite.

---

Your are what a cultist looks like

Brainwashed sheep led to slaughter.

---

It was a pretty good post if I say so myself.

Thanks.

Who's the hypocrite? Literally every single politician is essentially bankrolled by a billionaire. In Hillary's email leaks, she straight up said to give Soros whatever he wants. Ooh... I said Soros, now you can call me a conspiracy theorist instead of addressing the point. You don't think Biden is beholden to his donors? Get the [BLEEP] out of here with your whiney double standard. 

So what? Trump owes a billionaire money. Sure, Trump could end up in his pocket. You don't have proof. It's literally conjecture. It's a giant strawman and you're too haughty and ignorant to admit the truth of it. 

At least you managed to get through a post without LOLing all over yourself.

She handed Haiti to him as well. To Soros.

Not to get off topic but the Clinton's are to blame for that country.

---