THE LINCOLN PROJECT

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

She is very attractive. Way more so, when she's on stage with the others competing for the democratic nomination. Lowers the bar, so to speak...

classy. You're no better than Trump.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

classy. You're no better than Trump.

Not my fault they embrace Liz Warren, the embodiment of lying, hypocrisy, and nastiness.

My wife would say I'm a little better than Trump, I'm faithful to my family.

Lighten up, Francis.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Not my fault they embrace Liz Warren, the embodiment of lying, hypocrisy, and nastiness.

My wife would say I'm a little better than Trump, I'm faithful to my family.

Lighten up, Francis.

When she was your age, she too was a Republican.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

When she was your age, she too was a Republican Cherokee. Fixed it for you. You're welcome.

Princess Lies Through Her Teeth, who never stops shrieking about the evils of student loans, made a fortune teaching at Harvard. It's OK when SHE benefits from students going deep into debt, no one else is allowed to do it.

She never stops shrieking about the sinister nature of banks lending money to homeowners. But she make a pile flipping foreclosed properties with her husband. It's fine when she profits from the misery of others, everyone else who does so is a vulture.

She never stops shrieking about the evils of business. Yet she took huge money defending Travelers from liability claims of workers who died of asbestos exposure, and made a pile shielding companies from lawsuits filed by women who got sick from silicone breast implants. So it's OK for HER to profit from the risky nature of commerce, but evil when anyone else does it.

Any of that wrong?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Princess Lies Through Her Teeth, who never stops shrieking about the evils of student loans, made a fortune teaching at Harvard. It's OK when SHE benefits from students going deep into debt, no one else is allowed to do it.
Just how do you think she made a fortune?

Do you think her salary at Harvard compared to what she could make in a firm as one of the leading lawyers in her field?
Oh, I forgot, education is a calling and you should work for free. Where have you ever seen the cost of Professors as a driving cost of college education? And just how would her sitting in an endowed chair at Harvard add to anyone's educational cost?

She never stops shrieking about the sinister nature of banks lending money to homeowners. But she make a pile flipping foreclosed properties with her husband. It's fine when she profits from the misery of others, everyone else who does so is a vulture.

I thought you were a capitalist and it was good to make money. She flipped far fewer houses than a lot of people I know, a total of 5 and made less than 250K. She had issues with lending firms pushing legislation that gave them an unfair advantage in dealings with homeowners and if you look into what she pushed against it is pretty outrageous. Now compare her to the Foreclosure King, Mnuchin.

She never stops shrieking about the evils of business. Yet she took huge money defending Travelers from liability claims of workers who died of asbestos exposure, and made a pile shielding companies from lawsuits filed by women who got sick from silicone breast implants. So it's OK for HER to profit from the risky nature of commerce, but evil when anyone else does it.

Any of that wrong?

Do you think attorneys take work based on their political views?

Or do you believe that she enabled and abetted Travelers in defrauding the claimants? That she misrepresented something to the court?

She has made a couple million in the last 30 years in private practice.
That's not a very good salary for any category leading attorney.

She claims to be a capitalist, but she certainly gets under your skin and makes you shriek. Take a Midol.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Do you think attorneys take work based on their political views?

Or do you believe that she enabled and abetted Travelers in defrauding the claimants? That she misrepresented something to the court?

She has made a couple million in the last 30 years in private practice.
That's not a very good salary for any category leading attorney.

She claims to be a capitalist, but she certainly gets under your skin and makes you shriek. Take a Midol.

"Do you think her salary at Harvard compared to what she could make in a firm as one of the leading lawyers in her field'

It was reported she made $400k for teaching one, single class. That's a good gig. Good enough where she wanted it bad enough, to commit fraud on her application, and exploit the atrocities against Native Americans, to get it.

"Oh, I forgot, education is a calling and you should work for free"

You missed the point COMPLETELY. If she wants to get paid $400k to teach one class, and students want to pay the massive tuition to fund that, that's their business, it's a free country. But she has no right to then claim that it's wrong to profit from student debt. That's the point. If she can get rich from students going into debt, so can anyone else. Sorry if that went over your head.

Unless you're saying, as she is saying, that she has a right to get rich off of student loans, but no one else does? Why does she have a right to live differently than anyone else?

Your response was a weak dodge.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Do you think her salary at Harvard compared to what she could make in a firm as one of the leading lawyers in her field'

It was reported she made $400k for teaching one, single class. That's a good gig. Good enough where she wanted it bad enough, to commit fraud on her application, and exploit the atrocities against Native Americans, to get it.

"Oh, I forgot, education is a calling and you should work for free"

You missed the point COMPLETELY. If she wants to get paid $400k to teach one class, and students want to pay the massive tuition to fund that, that's their business, it's a free country. But she has no right to then claim that it's wrong to profit from student debt. That's the point. If she can get rich from students going into debt, so can anyone else. Sorry if that went over your head.

Unless you're saying, as she is saying, that she has a right to get rich off of student loans, but no one else does? Why does she have a right to live differently than anyone else?

Your response was a weak dodge.

Jim, her chair at Harvard is endowed.
Someone funded it specifically.
It doesn't cost students money and is a big plus to them to be in her class.

Your response is ignorant of the facts, but those silly things are inconvenient to Floridaman and Trumplicans.