Andrea Widburg; American Thinker
"Nevertheless, I would suggest that anyone whom Schiff defamed on the floor of the House immediately look into filing a defamation suit against him."
. . . "Back in May, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”) sent a referral letter to AG Pam Bondi, accusing Schiff of wrongdoing:
Mr. Schiff appears to have falsified records in order to receive favorable loan terms, and also appears to have been aware of the financial benefits of a primary residence mortgage when compared to a secondary residence mortgage as a spokesperson in 2023 told the media outlet CNN that, “Adam’s California and Maryland addresses have been listed as primary residences for loan purposes because they are both occupied throughout the year and to distinguish them from a vacation property.”
. . ."For the record, for mortgage purposes, the law doesn’t care how you use your property. However, you will get better mortgage rates only for the one property you designate as your primary residence.
"According to the FHFA referral, what Schiff did, while it might have made good sense to him financially, could have constituted a criminal act:" . . .
. . . "Nevertheless, I would suggest that anyone whom Schiff defamed on the floor of the House immediately look into filing a defamation suit against him. That’s because Schiff’s statements will retroactively have lost the protections granted congressmen under the Speech and Debate clause (Art I, Sec. 6, Cl. 1). It sure would be fun to see Schiff face one or more multimillion dollar defamation suits—and if I were the plaintiff’s lawyer, I would argue that any statute of limitations only started running at the moment it was discovered that Schiff’s tenure in the House was a fraud."
No comments:
Post a Comment