Well, you've taken it to a new level.Quote:
Originally Posted by road kill
I'll back down.......YOU WIN
Printable View
Well, you've taken it to a new level.Quote:
Originally Posted by road kill
I'll back down.......YOU WIN
It was an exceptional post.Quote:
Originally Posted by dnf777
RK;)
You believe $1,800,000 is reasonable? They apparently failed & the taxpayers of this country made them whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackstone
Would you expect someone from the USDA to publicly pronounce that the POTUS was truly what many believe him to be? I don't believe you to be that naive.Quote:
When presented with Breitbart’s allegations, a USDA spokesman issued the following response:
“These accusations are nothing more than an attempt to derail an effort to provide long-overdue compensation to thousands of farmers who were discriminated against over several decades. Current census numbers on black farmers are not the proper guide for the number of claimants, and certainly no basis for allegations of fraud. Out of the 15,000 claims processed under Pigford I, the FBI determined that only 3 claims were fraudulent, and this Administration is committed to ensuring that the new claims process has integrity and provides justice to those who have suffered discrimination.
Only about 63% of those claims were approved, even using the less-stringent Track A burden of proof.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/usda-...er-settlement/
http://nationaljournal.com/congress/...ement-20101122
But it's a long way from 2,500 max whuich was the intent of the original legislation, which apparently was circumvented by the bureaucracy. Is this why Espy was criminally indicted?
I don't believe we've heard the last of this - Jesse Jackson regards :).
I’m not going to debate the merits of the lawsuit. That has been done on this forum before. My original point was there were inaccuracies and distortions in the article, as there are with most information connected with Andrew Breitbart. You challenged that by saying, “Ya gotta do better than that - NR is highly respected.” So, I gave you what you asked for. The NR may be highly respected, but they aren’t very reliable.
By the USDA’s admission, they lost their land and their livelihood due to unfair USDA loan practices. Certainly, people have won much larger settlements for losing far less. I don’t know how much income they lost or the value of their land. Perhaps, the settlement wasn’t high enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin S
So, are you accusing the USDA and the FBI of being complicit in the fraud? That would be a pretty strong accusation. Any proof?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin S
The 2,500 was only an estimate of how many farmers might be eligible. It was not a capped maximum. See what I mean about how they distort the facts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin S
Espy had nothing to do with this case. If anything, he was in charge at the time some of the discriminatory loan practices were taking place. Obviously, prison is where he should be for more reasons than what he was convicted for.
I find it interesting that you are so concerned with the payout of the settlement, but not at all concerned with what caused the lawsuit to be filed in the first place. If there hadn’t been discriminatory lending practices, there would have never been a law suit, and no settlement. So, let’s put the blame where it belongs.
I guess this law suit, admission of guilt by the USDA, and the settlement disproves that argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin S
Only your sources are reliable :) !!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackstone
Anyone with supposed assets of that magnitude unable to figure out what is important, deserves the consequences!!!!!Quote:
By the USDA’s admission, they lost their land and their livelihood due to unfair USDA loan practices. Certainly, people have won much larger settlements for losing far less. I don’t know how much income they lost or the value of their land. Perhaps, the settlement wasn’t high enough.
No, nor am I willing to believe they weren't lying through their teeth.Quote:
So, are you accusing the USDA and the FBI of being complicit in the fraud? That would be a pretty strong accusation. Any proof?
Actually I believe you to be the one being disingenuous on this subject.Quote:
The 2,500 was only an estimate of how many farmers might be eligible. It was not a capped maximum. See what I mean about how they distort the facts?
Someone who looks like you not taking care of those who look like you, what's going on?Quote:
Espy had nothing to do with this case. If anything, he was in charge at the time some of the discriminatory loan practices were taking place. Obviously, prison is where he should be for more reasons than what he was convicted for.
I don't believe there should have been lending in the 1st place. But as there was I never said Pigford did not have a legitimate case. But a considerable portion of farming is being a good businessman, which apparnetly many in on this scam failed to realized. Other than their ability to farm the taxpayers.Quote:
I find it interesting that you are so concerned with the payout of the settlement, but not at all concerned with what caused the lawsuit to be filed in the first place. If there hadn’t been discriminatory lending practices, there would have never been a law suit, and no settlement. So, let’s put the blame where it belongs.
It proves little except how careless some can be with others money & how nincompoops in charge are still that.Quote:
I guess this law suit, admission of guilt by the USDA, and the settlement disproves that argument.
But the issue you were still pounding is Haley Barbour & his associations, while you are more than willing to rub elbows with people who engage in fraudulent practices, because they look like you. I believe you to be hypocritical on the subject & your postings have proven that :o.
In spite of the lending discrimination, they had received $1.5 million in loans? from a govt loan program?Quote:
Sherod and her husband received $300k in damages for the loss of their land and “pain and suffering.” The also got $1.5 mil. in debt forgiveness. This was in 2009, not in 2010 after the whole USDA incident.
And Shirley did find another livelihood that seems to have served her well. Maybe she just wasn't cut out to be a farmer?