Why would anyone ever trust you if you are going to not honor your obligations after you claim to be wronged in some way? This includes if you were to divert money you owe him to others absent his explicit approval.

If he really hacked your wallet, it would not be unreasonable to offset what was stolen with what you own him, provided you have evidence it was him. You would be nothing other than a scammer if you don’t repay what you promised to when you took out the loan minus what he allegedly stole from you.

1 - FIFY

2 - Why do you think anyone would care what a bunch of law professors think?

You are thinking of Senator Murkowski from Alaska. She still plans on voting 'no' however Republicans can afford to lose one Senator with no Democrat votes, and Senator Manchin from West Virginia announced he will cross party lines and vote yes.

With Senator Collins' announcement that she will vote to confirm Kavanaugh, along with Senator Flake's yes vote, it sounds like Kavanaugh will have sufficient votes to get confirmed.

Susan Collins should speak on the Senate floor shortly, and is expected to announce her intentions on how she will vote on the Kavanaugh nomination.

Edit: just as she started to speak, protestors from the Senate gallery overlooking the senate floor. She is now starting her speech.

She is now condemning the fake new being spread about Kavanaugh, and is condemning the special interest groups opposition before the identity of the nominee was known.

She is talking about how the assertions that Kavanaugh will strike down "pre-existing conditions" provisions in Obama care if/when Obama care is struck down as unconstitutional, and is countering that with several examples in which Kavanaugh argued to "surgically" remove unconstitutional provisions of laws, and uphold the remainder of said laws.

Now she is talking about how it is ridiculous that Trump should not be able to nominate anyone to the SC because of the meuller investigation, and says this is wrong because Clinton nominated Ginsberg and was approved 96-3
e
She appears to be laying the groundwork to supporting what seems likely to Vote 'yes' to the nomination.

Senator Collins is slamming those who say that Kavanaugh does not deserve the presumption of innocence, and other presumptions of fairness. She is defending these principals and giving the example of the Creepy Porn Lawyer's clients allegations as to why Kavanaugh needs to the presumption of innocence.

Senator Collins pointed out many inconsistencies in Professor Ford's story and testimony. One example she gave was that her lifelong friend who was allegedly at the party did not follow up with Ford after she stormed out of the party.  

Senator Collins just strongly condemned the person(s) who leaked Ford's letter to Senator Feinstein.

I was not thinking of Vod's rating for you when I made that statement, and I reviewed that rating, and I don't have an issue with it, as it also says "Seems to have a solid head and a good grasp of what is right and wrong" which indicates he has reason to believe you are trustworthy. What I had in mind was Lauda's positive rating for minifrij that says, in whole, "Keep up the good fight."

I am pretty sure I have said this previously, but I no longer believe you are an alt of lauda, and if I have not said so already, I apologize for that.

I don't think you should respect lauda though. He has a long history of acting unethically and has shown his primary purpose is to enrich himself.

I suspect this has to do with who he is friends with and who he is associated with.

In other words, he stole money from people he believed to be scammers. Now where have I heard that before?

Based on the testimony, it sounds like the person who this was referring to was in their group of friends. I don't think it would be reasonable to describe this as "making fun of someone with a disability".



It looks like that so called "law professor/lawyer" is going to take a class in libel law soon.

Please explain how exactly you "accidentally" scam someone. If someone looses money because of your mistake, that is not accidentally scamming someone, it is either you reimburse whoever lost money because of you, or you are explicitly intentionally scamming someone. Period.

What, do you want to exchange laundered money for other laundered money? Lol.

It seems that group of people almost entirely have their fingerprints on DT and many of them have acted unethically at best and illegally at worst. Calls for them to be removed have been ignored.

Just go away. The number of shenanigans you are involved in via aTriz shows you are willing to do just about anything to make a few dollars, even if that means others are harmed and/or defrauded. 

I don’t really think this is news. Bitfinex and tether got a new bank account somewhere. Other exchanges seem to have followed suit (who were banking at the same bank).

Also, banks don’t pay to convert USDT to USD, they process withdrawals as directed by tether (and Bitfinex when customers are withdrawing from their Bitfinex accounts). It is tether that will payout USD in exchange for USDT, and will only do so to customers who are vetted via KYC, are exchanging above a certain threshold, and generally will not do business with those connected to the US.

He is very active. If he did not respond within a day, he likely has no intention of doing so at all.

Lutpin was asked about this a long time ago and said he is not going to provide any kind of proof/evidence.

The above fact should end this conversation. At least in reference to removing mexxer because he is a "scammer". One could argue mexxer should be removed because his is inactive.....I would not though.

There is another scammer Blazed should remove though.

I don't think there is any public evidence that shows any of this is a lie. What you say is nothing more than speculation.

I think your list might be incomplete. See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=357263 a hero user who has not received any merit but is not on the list.

I suspect the number is far greater than what you say. If memory serves me correctly, well under 1% of all active accounts have received at least one merit as of a month or two ago.

I suspect you are referring to what you are saying in this thread I already resonated to, so I will post my response to that thread.


Edit: I just voted that we should ban these people. But we should only do this as long as there is zero evidence to support these people are state sponsored trolls.  I also don’t think a ban will go far enough. We should post all their sensitive information, but also only as long as there is zero evidence to supine this in order to prevent anyone from presenting evidence.

This seems like a fairly credible accusation.

I demand a full FBI investigation into this matter.

Until BADecker can disprove this, the administration should label all of his posts "potential state sponsored propaganda" despite the lack of evidence to corroborate this accusation.   

It is too bad that Senate staffers have already investigated all of the allegations, as has the media, both of which have been unable to verify any of the underlying facts, in other words, they have found the accusations to be baseless.  Senate democrat staffers have not participated in said investigations, despite being invited to do so, because Democrats do not care about the truth.