Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    40471
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Good stuff. I will offer this. Stringer tried to "legitimize" the business, but in doing so he abided neither by the codes of business nor the codes of the street. I think part of Simon's message here is that the codes of the street and business are not all that different from each other, but business has a veneer of civility that the street does not. A man got to have a code. Stringer had no code. Also, I suspect Butchie was himself the major player that got out and went mostly legit.
  2. Point of order, the Nightmare at 20,000 Feet was originally done in the series with William Shatner in 1963.
  3. Well, once this becomes the subject of actual law, it is conceivable that authorities could take criminal and civil enforcement action against violators. And, if the law permits, private civil suits by those damaged by violations. One notable thing about most state NIL laws: they provide no penalty. It is implicit in most of them that as long as they are complied with, athletes keep their eligibility and universities stay above board, both of which seems to rely on the NCAA for those determinations and enforcement. The problem with the NCAA is that it exists and existed by and with the consent of member institutions. It was disincented from taking severe action against too many of its similarly situated constituents. But once there is state-sponsored enforcement, that may change. But then the state, presumably the federal government, is going to have quite a mess on its hands and be pretty busy monitoring compliance and enforcing. It will probably require a new agency. Something needed to change, but I think finding that amateurism was insufficient justification for the collusive action of the NCAA was the wrong way to go about it. It just created Thunderdome. EDIT TO ADD: It is regulation, a line between the legitimate and the illegitimate, that enables Texas to participate. For better or worse, Texas decided as an institution to stay on the legitimate side of the "line" when there was barely any line at all. Now that the line is more clearly discernible, we're all in. But we're also seeing a bunch of schools willing to be on the other side of the line again, or at least straddling it, and we may be suffering for it. More regulation with enforcement can only help Texas given its current and historical position on the matter. But enforcement is a sticky wicket.
  4. Excellent point about FMV. The ultimate determinant of FMV is willing-buyer/willing-seller and so it is not a very helpful measure in this context. I think the phrase they're looking for is "commercially reasonable." Because most NIL deals aren't commercially reasonable from the standpoint of the player's name, image, and likeness. What's being purchase is not NIL, but prospective and current athletic ability. It's a bag. A bag delivered in the open, mostly, with a company logo and some decorative fringe on it, but a bag nonetheless. But even with a different measure, like "commercially reasonable," I don't think there's any principled way of determining it. What people correctly Intuit is that no reasonable company would pay these sums of money for the NIL and promotional efforts of a mostly unknown college athlete. But how you sort what is a reasonable NIL payment from the bag portion is nearly impossible.
  5. Weird suicidal combo, Benadryl, Zyrtec, amphetamine, and booze. The amphetamine could have been adderall or meth or anything in between and would counteract the hypnotic allergy drugs and the booze. The upper/downer combo is long-term super harmful, but not usually a suicide cocktail. Depends on the proportions though. RIP.
  6. Also laughable to think the Trump administration will prosecute anyone except political enemies based on any of this, and only if the risk to Trump can be contained. Remember, Trump was a Democrat for most of this.
  7. Of course it does. But, these people are vetting strangers and using a very specific business model to evade renting and selling. It's not wholly private. Like the deed restrictions in Shelley v. Kraemer, which preceded the FHA, they're using state-sanctioned and enforced vehicles, in the form of LLCs, and, when push comes to shove, I think the scheme very well may be held unconstitutional and the LLC voided for violation of public policy. Of course, then they'd be left with just doing it on a lick and a promise, "hey whitey, for a nominal fee you can come live on muh patch," but I think that's going to end up less attractive.
  8. https://fortune.com/2025/07/23/federal-reserve-renovation-cost-explained/ Commenced planning during the Trump administration, and Trump appointees insisted on using marble instead of the proposed glass. And, of course, Trump is lying his ass off about it.
  9. That's why he acted surprised. Then again it might have been 'bortion pr0n.
  10. That is actually exactly what I said above. Under oldlaw, though, I'm reasonably certain that arrangement would violate the 5th and `14th Amendments, if not the Fair Housing Act. There is a private cause of action under the FHA and 1983 of course. Oddly, there's only one Trump appointee in Arkansas, and he seems to be a piece of shit as regards civil rights laws.
  11. Well one of the main ways this administration has of coercing compliance with unenforceable and unlawful EOs is to withhold funding to those who do not comply, which itself is a dubious exercise of executive power. As far as I know, the federal government provides no funding to college athletics. I suppose it could attempt to withhold other funding from the university generally if it doesn't like their revenue-sharing or NIL practices, much as it does with DEI. That's gonna severely annoy some supporters of the administration in the SEC and elsewhere. So it probably won't happen.
  12. Well, you still have to acquire the land. Or the right to occupy and improve the land.
  13. Well, first off, you have to go a little deeper than a statement of the overall policy and into the Act itself. As a shorcut, let's do the section headings of potentially applicable sections. § 3601. Declaration of policy § 3602. Definitions § 3603. Effective dates of certain prohibitions § 3604. Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices § 3605. Discrimination in residential real estate-related transactions § 3606. Discrimination in the provision of brokerage services § 3607. Religious organization or private club exemption I think the main thing they're relying on is the discrimination occurs in the membership in the PMA, which is not any sort of real-estate transaction or rental or sale of housing. Then, once you're in the PMA, you buy shares in the LLC, again not a sale or rental of real property, which entitles you to build on and otherwise exercise ownership attributes over a chunk of the land. So, I think it literally probably evades the terms of the statutes. And maybe they're trying to squeeze into that religious/private club exemption. I think historically, this probably won't work. But with Ruckus & Co., who knows anymore.
  14. Yeah, he can't really argue that it was wEaPoNizAtion. This may be the pardon that Trump can't actually justify to himself or anyone else. There is, however, "substantial assistance" under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_35 But, it requires the cooperation of her sentencing judge.
  15. We have a handful that have come forward and then mostly disappeared. Paid off? Intimidated? Who knows. What we seem to lack are willing, credible witnesses. And, if you believe that law enforcement was unwilling to prosecute for reasons unrelated to the evidence, what makes you think they'll be willing to prosecute now? Why were Epstein and Maxwell prosecuted at all?
  16. Oh, I think he's deluded enough to actually believe it, in the context of "muh taxes."
  17. So sorry for your loss.
  18. Oh, he's one of those that claims to hate all politicians equally. And he's *very concerned* about the economy. So *concerned* that he loves the Big Beautiful Buttfucking because it might lower his taxes. While exploding the deficit and making life very, very hard on the least of us.
  19. Their strategy to avoid application of discrimination laws is interesting. Apparently, first you have to join a "PMA," a private membership association. This would seem not to offend discrimination laws, as a pretty much purely private matter. Then, once you are a member of the PMA, you can purchase shares or units of the LLC that owns the land. Again, mostly a private matter. But owning shares in the LLC then entitles you to occupation of the land itself and to build on the land. And this is where it gets sticky for them under the Fair Housing Act, among other statutes. I think this might, at least under oldlaw, be resolved in the same way as Shelley v. Kraemer, the state action is found in asking courts to enforce all of this legal mumbo jumbo in order to discriminate.
  20. Well, let me revise that. State prosecutors in relevant jurisdictions could bring state charges. However, state prosecutors would actually have access to the federal evidence, including unredacted grand jury testimony, without this being made public. Any notion that making any of this public is going to bring further legal consequences for those implicated is pretty far fetched.
  21. Anything beyond the 5th is superfluous made-up dramatic bullshit.
  22. As a general proposition, I might not hold bankruptcies against a bidnessman. But, specific to Trump: every time he's ventured out of real estate development, he's an abject failure.
  23. I sweatergawd, every time a DT poster comes in here, it posts some shit that is a dead giveaway that they have sucked up propaganda. AOC. Twenty million dollars. Christ. On. A. Crutch. Do you fuckers realize what we do with even "lefties" that come in here with such misinformation?
  24. AOC is worth 20 million? You need to unplug. Jesus fucking Christ. Trump has the free press and courts under complete assault. And also, how's that deficit doing? You think Trump is doing anything good for the economy? Are you out of your fucking mind?
  25. I don't care about parties. There needs to be some form of buffer between monetary policy and pure politics. That applies in a general case. Trump is a spastic shitmonkey that will do anything that is politically expedient. So it applies about x100 with him in office. Also, 50% inflation under Biden? GTFO with that. You need to unplug from your toxic media.
×
×
  • Create New...