(02-06-2015 04:07 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:22 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  I'm trying to figure out if there are any Dims that GayTom WILL go after.

Right...because liberals have to go after their own while the right doesn't. It's an old bit and we're tired of it.

As usual, you missed the entire point of my post. The fact that the right goes after their own and you ignore that, is on you not me.

I'm talking about here on this board...and sorry, it rarely happens unless it's something blatant.

(02-06-2015 03:02 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:51 PM)VA49er Wrote:  A home is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

As long as they are a cash buyer, this is 100% correct. A cash buyer can pay anything they damn well please. It's the mortgage company that has concerns about comparable values.

Seems the mortgage company would go after the appraiser. Could be appraisal fraud. Then if all parties were in it together, then yeah, that's fraud and I'd agree.

(02-06-2015 04:31 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 04:07 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:22 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  I'm trying to figure out if there are any Dims that GayTom WILL go after.

Right...because liberals have to go after their own while the right doesn't. It's an old bit and we're tired of it.

As usual, you missed the entire point of my post. The fact that the right goes after their own and you ignore that, is on you not me.

I'm talking about here on this board...and sorry, it rarely happens unless it's something blatant.

Okay, you made the statement, now you need to back it up.

Do you have a source for that? Please provide. Thanks.

(02-06-2015 04:36 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 04:31 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 04:07 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:22 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  I'm trying to figure out if there are any Dims that GayTom WILL go after.

Right...because liberals have to go after their own while the right doesn't. It's an old bit and we're tired of it.

As usual, you missed the entire point of my post. The fact that the right goes after their own and you ignore that, is on you not me.

I'm talking about here on this board...and sorry, it rarely happens unless it's something blatant.

Okay, you made the statement, now you need to back it up.

Do you have a source for that? Please provide. Thanks.

Oh Good ******* Lord. Again, you want me to prove the absence of something? What alternative reality do you people live in?

(02-06-2015 04:34 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 03:02 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:51 PM)VA49er Wrote:  A home is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

As long as they are a cash buyer, this is 100% correct. A cash buyer can pay anything they damn well please. It's the mortgage company that has concerns about comparable values.

Seems the mortgage company would go after the appraiser. Could be appraisal fraud. Then if all parties were in it together, then yeah, that's fraud and I'd agree.

From the breathless article, it seems like the buyer is pretty well heeled.
Do we know if the buyer took out a mortgage? The story doesn't say anything about a mortgage so I think it is probably a cash buyer.

Cash buyers can have an appraisal done, but it is not required in a cash transaction. No mortgage, no appraiser required, then no mortgage fraud. Just an exchange of funds at the title company.

(02-06-2015 04:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 04:36 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 04:31 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 04:07 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(02-06-2015 02:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...because liberals have to go after their own while the right doesn't. It's an old bit and we're tired of it.

As usual, you missed the entire point of my post. The fact that the right goes after their own and you ignore that, is on you not me.

I'm talking about here on this board...and sorry, it rarely happens unless it's something blatant.

Okay, you made the statement, now you need to back it up.

Do you have a source for that? Please provide. Thanks.

Oh Good ******* Lord. Again, you want me to prove the absence of something? What alternative reality do you people live in?

Okay, so you can't back up your statement. This sounds a bit like throwing poo and running away.

It's becoming apparent you can't help yourself, please find your way to the WWWESR, your antics will still be tolerated there for some reason. Thanks.

...

CREW filed ethics complaint yesterday over the house sale.

Politico also had a nice long story about Schock's high flying and very expensive spending habits.

It also mentioned his 'full time personal photographer' paid for by his campaign fund and taxpayers. Hmmm. Is he a really attractive male who quite fabulous himself? Yep. I suppose that photographer took all those fab-u-lous photos of Schock on his world trips. Hmm. Looks like we might have another Schrock oops I mean Schock.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/aa...15020.html

(02-10-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  CREW filed ethics complaint yesterday over the house sale.

Politico also had a nice long story about Schock's high flying and very expensive spending habits.

It also mentioned his 'full time personal photographer' paid for by his campaign fund and taxpayers. Hmmm. Is he a really attractive male who quite fabulous himself? Yep. I suppose that photographer took all those fab-u-lous photos of Schock on his world trips. Hmm. Looks like we might have another Schrock oops I mean Schock.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/aa...15020.html

Still waiting for your outrage over Obama's real estate patron, Tony Rezko.

(02-10-2015 11:50 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  CREW filed ethics complaint yesterday over the house sale.

Politico also had a nice long story about Schock's high flying and very expensive spending habits.

It also mentioned his 'full time personal photographer' paid for by his campaign fund and taxpayers. Hmmm. Is he a really attractive male who quite fabulous himself? Yep. I suppose that photographer took all those fab-u-lous photos of Schock on his world trips. Hmm. Looks like we might have another Schrock oops I mean Schock.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/aa...15020.html

Still waiting for your outrage over Obama's real estate patron, Tony Rezko.

Yup, much worse than what's happening here with Schock.

Real Estate scandal? If he were a democrat I guess that would qualify him to be POTUS (cough cough... whitewater)