comix4fun

Yeah, I remembered him from Shameless. Man, he's matured as an actor too. Really great. Really everyone in the cast gets time, gets layers and depth. Everyone sucks, but everyone is also awesome, everyone gets attention and more than one note. There are episodes in season 2 that I watched 4-5 times.

Gotta get past the first two episodes, they are mega-stress...but I think that's to set to base for the show. It shifts a bit after that. It's really one of the best character studies, everyone gets multiple layers, I've seen in a long time. And I think you'll be shocked at what Ebon does with Richie.

No one's even mentioned Ebon Moss-Bachrach. He's pretty much perfect for Ben Grimm. If you haven't seen "The Bear" you're missing one of the best written, best acted, characters in the last couple decades of television. Ebon.... "COUSIN!" really gave layers and depth to a character that could have been one note or a stereotype to the point that I think he could probably nail almost any role. As Ben Grimm, intelligent but gruff, acerbic, bitter, angry but sensitive I think he might have been born to play that role.

That's a creature of efficiency and piggybacking. If criminal action is happening, and in motion, civil plaintiffs will normally wait and let the case work its way out. If they are suing civilly for the same set of facts and actions on the defendant's part they may want to wait to see if there's a conviction for 1) a finding by the court that part of the penalty is restitution to the plaintiffs and other injured parties if named and 2) a "beyond a reasonable doubt" finding in a criminal case is harder to obtain than "preponderance" in the civil actions and thus make the potential for an end result in plaintiff's favor (or a settlement in the face of certain defeat for the plaintiffs) a certainty and only amount of damages and penalties the only real question. If CGC weren't concerned about immediately stopping the businesses and the books and any ongoing actions of the defendants, and they knew there was a criminal case pending that wouldn't cause them to watch the clock for statutes of limitations, they could save some money and doubt as to outcome letting government authorities do the heavy lifting. Also, CGC has zero control over a criminal investigation beyond making the complaint. Law enforcement has control over basically all of the steps taken to investigate, prosecute or decline to prosecute these types of cases. This would be, at its heart, an FBI matter (or perhaps US Postal Inspectors in conjunction with the FBI or DOJ), given that it crosses state lines, uses the postal service, and telecommunications and the internet to effectuate the crimes. In reality, given the above, waiting isn't a real option like it would be in a more simple state or county case.

I have the full NY suit filing downloaded now. If anyone really wants to read through it, PM me for an email of it.

Until I can log in for myself, here's a link that breaks down the latest filing.

Part of my evening prayers for years. Not getting any traction though.

That posting by Mike said there were 20 reports FROM him in a 48 hour period...a pattern of "Bait, Foment, Incite, Report" it seems.

I’ve let almost all my employees work from home since 2020 now. I wish I could do that. Or yell at someone to get me coffee. I got screwed by not practicing in the 60’s

That exculpates him from all responsibility for his own words and actions. It seems it’s his own postings that hold the biggest grudge against him, because that’s where the suspensions come from.

Probably not until I get to the office tomorrow. But I can see if one of my partners went in today

Not rehashing. Just not letting things go unsaid. But I take your point and if the stuff in his thread didn’t get it locked already…I think we’re gonna make it.

Was there some earth shattering, otherwise unobtainable, epiphany to be found in “treat customers right”? That’s the clue to whether you’ve got to speak up in defense of it. It’s not a good point, it’s a vehicle, in the context of past words and actions and in conjunction with attempts to reenter this community and reliance on people who don’t even know that a Hall of Shame exists, to seem rational, reasonable and to have the “great reputation” line be given weight it would not otherwise be given. That’s why it’s not ad hominem. Who is speaking, and their record, is entirely relevant to how the words are taken and to avoid being manipulated into accepting something so banal as his “be nice to customers” as a gateway to accepting the rest of his comment in face value…especially if you have no knowledge of who they are. Check out those probation and hall of shame lists. Lots of context to be had. I’ll add this, wherever Chip has found customers to trust him, I wish him well, and I wish them luck. They are free as you are to use or ignore anything in the context of dealing with him. That doesn’t change a thing about this place, and doesn’t mean anyone owes him a Second, Third, Fifth chance.

You’re defending the post of a multi decade serial scam artist who’s returned to rehab his name despite being placed on the worst list we have here. Does anyone need to learn anything from him other than to avoid him? We can learn our actual lessons from almost literally anyone else. Especially the obvious “be good to people” which was, what should have been, an obvious shroud to press his rehabilitation tour. That might be advice worth taking too. Along with digging into the context of who is posting.

You mean him saying he’s got an excellent reputation didn’t mean he was saying he has an excellent reputation? Shoehorning misplaced self aggrandizement (by a hall of shame member no less) into this discussion doesn’t get a pass because a patronizing cliche about customer service is tacked on the end.

You just rated yourself here, in place where you don’t have an “excellent reputation” as having an “excellent reputation” that’s rating yourself. Back patting in this place will have predictable results.

You rating yourself as having an excellent reputation has given me a great idea for a new site: part ratings site, part psychological affirmation….. I’ll call it “Self Yelp”

Oh that’s what I meant by “I was the remote control”. Dad would say “change the channel” and I was up moving across the room. you’ll certainly blow kids minds today with the black and white though.

That’s possible I guess. What’s weird is, this was my first post (below) in the thread , answering the questions regarding the meaning of “plaintiff has not publicized” and the meaning of the plaintiff putting up “security” against seized assets of the defendant. I can’t imagine this would be the cause of the response.

Yeah I had a guy that good when I represented Frank Frazetta on some matters back in the day. A great PI is almost superhuman. Worth every penny.

That’s interesting. Had not considered an intentional aspect. It’s a really expensive filing to go for a dismissal intentionally. I’d never be comfortable deciding that was the intent without knowing more. It’s possible this first run was to splash all of that extra broad detail out there now as it shows a lot of proactive measures to find the issues, and address them. When it’s refiled in a more narrow and well plead format the information is now already out there perhaps? I’ve found defendants, who didn’t want to be found, on the other side of the country though. A good PI is worth his weight in gold in those situations. And a judgement, even with no direct financial recourse is, maybe, a shield or with a benefit not yet known. I was hoping this would go the distance to see all of the pleadings as they are filed. But that’s my selfish curiosity. I guess we have to wait and see where this goes.

My first thought was that scene in American Gangster …but with comics. Probably not so great in reality.

I did look it up on pacer, yesterday, and downloaded full pdfs. I’m just not where I can look it up on a Friday night, chief. I didn’t say you didn’t know how to look things up, that was you talking to pretty much everyone else in this thread, so I was just wondering why everything you write drips with condescension. Sad about the lack of hot chicks though….we bond on that.

😂 you’re power tripping and the lights are out.

Any time you want to compare legal backgrounds, I’m your huckleberry. I’ve been at it longer than there’s been a CGC , just for a benchmark. And I won’t have to make cryptic three word posts with half-assed phone pics to pump my ego either. Someone way out of their depth would post about a case being dismissed, connoting finality, and leave out “without prejudice”..to, I don’t know, be provocative. But, really, enjoy not having the first clue who you’re talking to.