The Many Faces of US Politics...

[Gmac]

Not yet perhaps.

But one victim has been making plenty of noise recently about Carlson's pushing of conspiracy theories against them personally.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76363

Mr Epps. I believe you yourself periodically try to push this one here.

all bs , cbs 60 minutes and nbc defending the only guy on tape talking about going inside the capitol building who hasn't been charged with a crime, why are regime backed media outlets defending him alone ? Maybe he went to the cult deprogramming counseling that is part of punishment for some offenders.

[J70]

Not yet perhaps.

But one victim has been making plenty of noise recently about Carlson's pushing of conspiracy theories against them personally.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76363

Mr Epps. I believe you yourself periodically try to push this one here.

all bs , cbs 60 minutes and nbc defending the only guy on tape talking about going inside the capitol building who hasn't been charged with a crime, why are regime backed media outlets defending him alone ? Maybe he went to the cult deprogramming counseling that is part of punishment for some offenders.

"regime-backed media outlets"?

Do you ever listen to yourself?

Any little thing to grab onto to try to deny what happened that day and the role of your presidential nominee-to-be in orchestrating a vicious attack on democracy.

How many people have been charged with "talking about going inside the capitol building" or even incitement of a riot?

About 2000 people did go in. About half have been charged with various crimes, the most serious of which were assaults on police officers.

[Gmac]

Not yet perhaps.

But one victim has been making plenty of noise recently about Carlson's pushing of conspiracy theories against them personally.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76363

Mr Epps. I believe you yourself periodically try to push this one here.

all bs , cbs 60 minutes and nbc defending the only guy on tape talking about going inside the capitol building who hasn't been charged with a crime, why are regime backed media outlets defending him alone ? Maybe he went to the cult deprogramming counseling that is part of punishment for some offenders.

"regime-backed media outlets"?

Do you ever listen to yourself?

Any little thing to grab onto to try to deny what happened that day and the role of your presidential nominee-to-be in orchestrating a vicious attack on democracy.

How many people have been charged with "talking about going inside the capitol building" or even incitement of a riot?

About 2000 people did go in. About half have been charged with various crimes, the most serious of which were assaults on police officers.

incitement of a riot ? isn't that what Trump was impeached for and majority of democrats want him locked up for it . They are regime media

[J70]

Not yet perhaps.

But one victim has been making plenty of noise recently about Carlson's pushing of conspiracy theories against them personally.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76363

Mr Epps. I believe you yourself periodically try to push this one here.

all bs , cbs 60 minutes and nbc defending the only guy on tape talking about going inside the capitol building who hasn't been charged with a crime, why are regime backed media outlets defending him alone ? Maybe he went to the cult deprogramming counseling that is part of punishment for some offenders.

"regime-backed media outlets"?

Do you ever listen to yourself?

Any little thing to grab onto to try to deny what happened that day and the role of your presidential nominee-to-be in orchestrating a vicious attack on democracy.

How many people have been charged with "talking about going inside the capitol building" or even incitement of a riot?

About 2000 people did go in. About half have been charged with various crimes, the most serious of which were assaults on police officers.

incitement of a riot ? isn't that what Trump was impeached for and majority of democrats want him locked up for it . They are regime media

Nah, that was "incitement of insurrection", not a riot. And impeachment charges are not criminal charges. The criminal charges might come yet in the Jack Smith investigation.

Regardless, you didn't answer the question. Were any of the Jan 6 people charged with telling people to enter the Capitol?

[whitey]

Not yet perhaps.

But one victim has been making plenty of noise recently about Carlson's pushing of conspiracy theories against them personally.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76363

Mr Epps. I believe you yourself periodically try to push this one here.

all bs , cbs 60 minutes and nbc defending the only guy on tape talking about going inside the capitol building who hasn't been charged with a crime, why are regime backed media outlets defending him alone ? Maybe he went to the cult deprogramming counseling that is part of punishment for some offenders.

Epps was an informant of some description

I wouldn't believe one word that comes out of  the FBI as it pertains to him

[Gmac]

Not yet perhaps.

But one victim has been making plenty of noise recently about Carlson's pushing of conspiracy theories against them personally.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76363

Mr Epps. I believe you yourself periodically try to push this one here.

all bs , cbs 60 minutes and nbc defending the only guy on tape talking about going inside the capitol building who hasn't been charged with a crime, why are regime backed media outlets defending him alone ? Maybe he went to the cult deprogramming counseling that is part of punishment for some offenders.

Epps was an informant of some description

I wouldn't believe one word that comes out of  the FBI as it pertains to him

they locked up the shaman until the hidden video came out and then released him , how many more are locked up for f all I wonder

[J70]

Not yet perhaps.

But one victim has been making plenty of noise recently about Carlson's pushing of conspiracy theories against them personally.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna76363

Mr Epps. I believe you yourself periodically try to push this one here.

all bs , cbs 60 minutes and nbc defending the only guy on tape talking about going inside the capitol building who hasn't been charged with a crime, why are regime backed media outlets defending him alone ? Maybe he went to the cult deprogramming counseling that is part of punishment for some offenders.

Epps was an informant of some description

I wouldn't believe one word that comes out of  the FBI as it pertains to him

they locked up the shaman until the hidden video came out and then released him , how many more are locked up for f all I wonder

Source?

[whitey]

J70-any thoughts on the new mortgage rules where people with higher credit scores pay higher fees and those with lower credit scores pay lower fees

[J70]

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that the FBI did have something on Epps and he was an informant and he was "encouraging" others to go inside the building, what does that mean? Does that excuse their subsequent actions? There is a long history of cops and other security forces using informants and undercover agents to infiltrate and prosecute criminal activity. It didn't help the Michigan kidnappers.

If the man who meets me in a dark alley to sell me drugs is an informant or undercover agent, am I now innocent and off the hook? Or let's say a friend of my wife gets into trouble and turns informant, and then entices myself and herself into some dodgy, illegal deal. Is the judge going to dismiss our case? Does our own responsibility and agency go out the window?

Opportunity is not entrapment.

What's the angle here? That 2000 people, including Oath Keepers and Proud Boys who had been planning this stuff, complete with paramilitary tactics and equipment, for weeks, were all hoodwinked the night before and on the day, into invading the Capitol, attacking and seriously injuring cops, and damaging and stealing property along with the way?

Are MAGA types extremely dumb and gullible people who don't know right from wrong?

I don't get it. I mean, I get the attraction of having an excuse that allows you to rationalize and dismiss what they did, but it just doesn't hold water for any honest, semi-intelligent person.

[J70]

J70-any thoughts on the new mortgage rules where people with higher credit scores pay higher fees and those with lower credit scores pay lower fees

Yes.

I've no issue with it. People with lower scores are still going to be paying significantly higher fees than those with higher scores.

Its just that the low rate associated with higher scores is going to be a little larger, and the higher rate associated with lower scores is going to be a little lower. The lower score rate is still way higher than the higher score rate.

At least from what I've read.

[whitey]

J70-any thoughts on the new mortgage rules where people with higher credit scores pay higher fees and those with lower credit scores pay lower fees

Yes.

I've no issue with it. People with lower scores are still going to be paying significantly higher fees than those with higher scores.

Its just that the low rate associated with higher scores is going to be a little larger, and the higher rate associated with lower scores is going to be a little lower. The lower score rate is still way higher than the higher score rate.

At least from what I've read.

I can see both sides

If you have been fiscally prudent and paid your bills on time why should you be penalized by having to pay a higher rate essentially subsidizing those with lower scores who weren't as careful with their credit score

It's essentially redistribution of wealth

Not everyone who has a low credit score is poor. Some people make very bad decisions and buy cars, houses and boats they really can't afford. The guys who does the financing at the dealership was telling me that you'd be shocked at some of the stuff he sees (in terms of "wealthy" people with bad credit scores"

On the other hand, anything that helps the less well off buy a house is positive for society.

[J70]

If I'm understanding it correctly, it basically affects closing costs. A few hundred dollars difference in most cases. Not something to get worked up about in my opinion. Those with lower scores are already getting hit with the much more significant issue of higher interest rates for 15 or 30 years or whatever their term is.

[whitey]

If I'm understanding it correctly, it basically affects closing costs. A few hundred dollars difference in most cases. Not something to get worked up about in my opinion. Those with lower scores are already getting hit with the much more significant issue of higher interest rates for 15 or 30 years or whatever their term is.

So why, hypothetically, should someone who's made good decisions subsidize the fees of those who've made bad decisions (and I know that not everyone with a low credit score has made bad decisions, but the ones who have, are still being subsidized)

[J70]

Have the lower score people been subsidizing the higher score people before this? Is this a zero sum game?

If lower score people were paying lower fee rates compared to higher score people, I could understand, but the actual fee rates for lower scoring people are still significantly higher.

If we are talking about a zero sum game, its like someone whining that they're subsidizing the other person because their portion of the pie dropped from 70% to 65%, whereas the other person's increased from 30% to 35%.

[whitey]

Have the lower score people been subsidizing the higher score people before this? Is this a zero sum game?

If lower score people were paying lower fee rates compared to higher score people, I could understand, but the actual fee rates for lower scoring people are still significantly higher.

If we are talking about a zero sum game, its like someone whining that they're subsidizing the other person because their portion of the pie dropped from 70% to 65%, whereas the other person's increased from 30% to 35%.

But they're paying a higher rate for a reason.....greater risk of default


So I know a guy whose credit is shot.....makes well into the  six figures. Bought a house he shouldn't have, went underwater, had to relocate for work and short saled the house.

Why should I pay higher fees to "subsidize" his bad decisions?

BTW-he has a leased BMW and a Mercedes in the driveway. My last Toyota had 287,000 miles on the clock