Andy Ogles (R) Tenn raided by FBI
I really wish we could get any semblance of law and order back. With this Supreme Court, I fear not.
I really wish we could get any semblance of law and order back. With this Supreme Court, I fear not.
News Article: Who among us hasn't "mistakenly" loaned ourselves $320,000?
- Thread starter dtgreg
- Start date
Tennessee has some really fine people serving us in DC and Nashville.
On the other side of the coin, that's what the wealthiest kind of do these days. They take massive loans out against their investment holdings and write down the interest as losses, so they never have to pay income taxes. Some even brag that they don't "pay themselves", which is deviously untrue.
equifund.com
Buy, Borrow, Die: How to Get Richer & Avoid Taxes Like Billionaires
Discover the "Buy, Borrow, Die" strategy: Buy an asset like stock & real estate, borrow against it at low-interest rates, and pass them on —tax-free — at death.
equifund.com
On reading the article, I don’t think Ogles mistakenly lent himself $320K.
It looks like he claimed to have lent his campaign $320K. Trouble is, his financial disclosures don’t indicate that he had $320K in cash to have funded the loan — raising the question of how he could have lent money that he claims not to have.
So why would he falsely claim to have lent his campaign the money?
So the campaign could repay a sham loan with real cash.
IOW, when the campaign repays the “loan,” Ogles personally pockets $320K (derived from real cash campaign contributions), ostensibly collecting on an obligation that in fact never really existed in the first place.
I think he’s busted on the same level as George Santos and Bob Menendez. And as much as we might disagree with some recent rulings, I don’t see where this is an issue for SCOTUS.
It looks like he claimed to have lent his campaign $320K. Trouble is, his financial disclosures don’t indicate that he had $320K in cash to have funded the loan — raising the question of how he could have lent money that he claims not to have.
So why would he falsely claim to have lent his campaign the money?
So the campaign could repay a sham loan with real cash.
IOW, when the campaign repays the “loan,” Ogles personally pockets $320K (derived from real cash campaign contributions), ostensibly collecting on an obligation that in fact never really existed in the first place.
I think he’s busted on the same level as George Santos and Bob Menendez. And as much as we might disagree with some recent rulings, I don’t see where this is an issue for SCOTUS.
Last edited:
Amazon Deals for TideFans!
Purchases may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.