PhilipTheBucket

Memepool

Scary Go Round

Everything2.com (holy shit! still exists)

!fark@ibbit.at

The SEC's suit alleges that between 2020 and 2022, Mehr and Lopez, "made material misrepresentations" to hundreds of investors about the bankrupt retailers they had acquired. For example, to entice individuals to invest in their acquisitions, they said their portfolio companies were "on fire" and that "cash flow is strong." They also told prospective backers that money raised for a company would only be invested in that specific firm. That proved not to be the case

Of course, who knows whether it is true, although it sounds plausible. But absolutely it sounds like they intended to defraud investors.

REV was accused of buying a bunch of semi-worthless businesses and then pumping up their value in various ways from 2020 to 2022. During the time of the alleged behavior, they owned Radio Shack, and their ownership of it was involved in the alleged malfeasance it sounds like.

The fact that after all was said and done, they sold it, doesn't really have a lot of bearing on what they were or weren't doing with it years before, when they did own it.

"Consequently, in order to pay interest, dividends and maturing note payments, Defendants resorted to using a combination of loans from outside lenders, merchant cash advances, money raised from new and existing investors, and transfers from other portfolio companies to cover obligations."

You know, just some sparkling investment fraud

I feel like the designer responsible smuggled this video topic to him somehow, after not hearing from anyone who had noticed their exhaustive attention to detail

There is 0% chance that this didn't take a shitload of "unnecessary" effort, including updating the power lines every time something in the level got modified or rearranged

Yeah. The judge in that situation was pretty chill with me as well. I feel like it's like a lot of human interactions, if you show that you respect the other person's side of the interaction, they'll be inclined to do extra for you where they can.

And FFS, dress appropriately.

Random story, I once showed up groomed and in a suit that was sharp enough that the judge thought I was defense counsel (with the defendant not showing up) instead of the defendant, and I had to politely correct him. 😃

This?

https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/publications/ETAOP_2023-07_Advancing_Employment_Opportunities_for_Justice-Involved_Individuals_through_Work-Based_Learning_Experiences_%28Issue%20Brief%29.pdf

The study that Trump's Department of Labor funded in 2018/2019 which then decided to use "justice-involved" in their report?

Why is that "democrat activists" or "democrat members"?

Which is fine as far as it goes, yet does very little if anything to address the body of the above concerns.

What? Of course it does. A near-unanimous consensus by experts in the field is worth more than whatever you are bringing up in your Lemmy comment.

I mean, it would be possible to lay out logic so compelling that even if experts in the field felt one particular way about it you could make a case otherwise, but weird strawmen like wanting archaeological evidence of Jesus's specific skeleton or something is not that.

In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart D. Ehrman wrote, "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees."[13] Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church's imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more."[14] Robert M. Price does not believe that Jesus existed but agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars.[15] James D. G. Dunn calls the theories of Jesus's non-existence "a thoroughly dead thesis".[16] Michael Grant (a classicist), "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary."[17] Robert E. Van Voorst states that biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted.[18] Writing on The Daily Beast, Candida Moss and Joel Baden state that, "there is nigh universal consensus among biblical scholars – the authentic ones, at least – that Jesus was, in fact, a real guy."[19]

Plus when I looked up a few terms I had never heard of they were being used in places like the department of labour publications

Interesting, which terms?