The REAL Story of the Langbord 1933’s

Hey Kurt, we don't want you to change; I think they just want us to exercise the "Thought Check" button occasionally before we hit the "Post Reply" button.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I can't BEGIN to express how much that fact dismays me, because yes, as Jim has posited, I'd greatly prefer a largely unfettered experience.

But certainly one indisputable fact is that if there are large numbers of rejected reports from members, that lends credence to the idea that the line is obvious only to you. If I'm getting it wrong on one side, and many others are getting it wrong on the other side, perhaps the rule is as clear as the old NFL catch rule. I'm sure the NFL thought that rule was clear too. Sure, it was written in plain language, but it operated in practice in ways that served only to confound.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I think I'll listen to today's Supreme Court oral argument over dinner.

 

Its Ok to argue out loud with the supreme court as you watch but remember what you said

"If I'm getting it wrong on one side, and many others are getting it wrong on the other side, perhaps the rule is as clear as the old NFL catch rule. I'm sure the NFL thought that rule was clear too. Sure, it was written in plain language, but it operated in practice in ways that served only to confound."

It seems to apply to your program as well, just substitute SCOTUS for NFL!

Enjoy your dinner, I have to go to work for a few hours. " Discussion of the Insula lobe of the brain on drugs addictions and other habituations. "

 

Reported this for political opinion regarding the supreme court.

 

Who moderates reported violations made by the moderators?

 

You can't put them on ignore either.

 

An interesting biography is Too Rich: The High Life and Tragic Death of King Farouk by William Stadiem.

A fascinating story published in 1991 but doesn't mention the 1933 coin.


Egypt 2 Piastres 1944 - King Farouk (who owned a coin that you can't own)

 

I got to see one of the 33's in Denver. Looked at it a few times, Beautiful, I questioned the second time, if it was the same coin.
Not sure, unless they displayed different ones each day?

Was it the Farouk coin that triggered the search for the rest of them? Or, was the Government always aware of the missing pieces?

 

I'm guessing Doug and/or Peter.

Next question, show of hands: how many here have ever reported one of Doug's posts?

 

Don't worry , if I made an error, Doug will rule properly. However,

"In a recent public appearance, Chief Justice John Roberts expressed concern about the extreme polarization and partisanship that have gripped the other branches of the federal government. He was particularly concerned that, because of the increasingly partisan nature of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation process, Americans might get the false impression that the Supreme Court itself might fall victim to such politicization. He assured his audience that that is not the case, that the Court is not “a political entity,” and that the Court is not “divided into Republicans and Democrats.” In short, he explained, that is not “how [the Court] works.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/our-politically-polarized_b_5879346.html

So how can it be a political discussion , when itself says it isn't a political entity? Like dissing UPS or ebay.......

 

OK, so that's back on the table!

 

It wasn't really the Farouk coin that triggered a search by the government. But the lawyer representing the owner in that case was contacted by the Langbords to handle their ten coins. It was no small mistake because, presumably with the advice of that lawyer, the Langbords submitted the coins to the government for authentication. So, now the government has permanent possession of the coins. There are three others known. Two are in the Smithsonian (I've seen one!). The last is in private hands; those hands not known to the public and presumably not to the government.

Cal

 

Hey, we diss eBay all the time.

 

Just curious - were the Langbord coins probated and taxed as part of the estate?

 

Of course not. They just happened to be miraculously "found" in the Langbord's safe deposit box right after the Farouk case was settled. It was "pure coincidence".

 

I'm not sure which is more troubling. If the C.J. can look around that conference table and pronounce the Court to be apolitical, is it whether HE believes that, or that he expects US to believe that?

On the other hand, with all 3 of the most reliable left-leaning justices being all women, maybe it's just a gender thing.

 

You suppose nithing in that safe deposit box was listed as an asset of the estate? Seems to me the Treasury Department may have had them no matter the outcome. Anyway - if the coins had been properly probated - maybe this would have enough to swing the case the other way.

 

No, they would have had to be forfeited either way. Estates cannot legally pass stolen goods.

 

Yes, but the Treasury Department would have been provided notice that the coins existed and set back and did nothing while benefiting from the estate tax collection on those coins for over a dozen years.

 

And this "setting back" is PRECISELY what the Treasury Department has never ever done regarding 1933 Double Eagles.