Epic Real Estate Investing - Exposed: What's Really Behind Trump's Real Estate Battle | 1290

Episode Date: January 11, 2024

Dive deep into the intricate web of former President Trump's real estate dealings as we unpack the investigation led by New York Attorney General, Letitia James. In this riveting episode, we dissect the allegations against Trump, emphasizing the absence of physical harm and raising critical questions about the motivations behind the legal scrutiny. Our astute speaker navigates the blurred lines between civil and criminal cases, unraveling the complexities that make this investigation a legal enigma. As we explore the allegations, we ponder: Who are the true victims in this high-stakes real estate saga? Beyond the legal drama, this episode offers valuable insights for small investors, drawing essential lessons from Trump's situation. From understanding the nuances of civil and criminal proceedings to deciphering the impact on the real estate landscape, we provide a comprehensive analysis to empower listeners with knowledge. But that's not all – we also touch on the concept of a news diet, emphasizing the crucial role of objectivity and skepticism in comprehending news events. Join us as we dissect the layers of Trump's real estate puzzle, offering a thought-provoking exploration that goes beyond the headlines. Press play now and gain a deeper understanding of the multifaceted world of real estate, politics, and media dynamics. P.S. Whenever you're ready to go deeper and further with your real estate investing, looking into my partner program to help you get your first deal might be the move... take the first step here for free 👉 https://epicearnwhileyoulearn.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

So what I did is I just took all my notes from this podcast that I've been loosely reading from, and I plugged them into chat GPT, just in case I was missing something. And I asked, chat, here's how I see it, this is all the research I've done. What am I supposed to learn here? What am I missing? So this is what was chat's output. This is Terio Media. Hey, strap in.

It's time for the epic real estate. estate investing show. We'll be your guides as we navigate the housing market, the landscape of creative financing strategies, and everything you need to swap that office chair for a beach chair. If you're looking for some one-on-one help, meet us at rei-aise.com. Let's go, let's go, let's go, let's go, let's go, let's go, let's go. Let's go. All right, picture this rock stars. It's New York City, the concrete jungle, where dreams are made, right? In the heart of it all, you've got Trump, the real estate mobile, his name glittering on towers and rinks. like a Broadway marquee, but wait, plot twist, enter the New York Attorney General, Letitia James,

like a sheriff and an old Wester, ready to stir things up. So here's the deal. James isn't just knocking on Trump's door. She's bringing the house down. She's gunning for a ban, a lifetime ban, for Trump from the New York real estate scene. Imagine that. New York without Trump and real estate, it's like a pizza, without cheese. And the drunk. trauma intensifies here. James isn't just stopping at a ban. She's slapping a whopping $370 million fine on Trump for what she calls ill-gotten gains. That's like telling someone to cough up the entire value of the Empire State Building. So this stage now, it's set for a showdown. Trump's civil fraud trial. It's like a scene from a courtroom drama. And the allegations? Well, a decade-long

spree of fudging numbers and playing fast and loose with property values. It's like, someone took Monopoly, mixed it with risk, and then threw in a dash of House of Cards. And then James' team, it's like a group of detectives and a crime thriller. They've got the spreadsheets, they've got the e-mail, they've got all the documents and everything. They got the works. And they're painting a picture of Trump inflating his worth faster than a balloon at Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade. But wait. Trump's got to come back.

His lawyer, Christopher Akis, fires back. And he calls James demands unconscionable and untethered from reality. It's like watching a verbal tennis match where the stakes are higher than the Trump Tower. And Trump himself, he's not just sitting back. He's throwing accusations left and right, claiming James and Judge Engerun are singling him out. It's like watching a political game of thrones and Trump's playing the role of the embattled king. And the plot continues to thicken with a proposed ban for Trump's sons too. The whole family, I mean, the family empire is shaking.

Imagine that dinner table conversation right about now. So the finale is still up in the air. I think we'd all kind of rooting for it to end. But the judge's final ruling, it's like the season finale cliffhanger that just, it leaves you biting your nails. Will Trump dodge the bullet, or will New York real estate get a new storyline

without its most famous name? I've pridefully been on a news diet now for a full year. And it's been amazing. depression, worry, bad moods. They've all been cut. I don't know. I don't have an official measuring stick for this, but I'd say at least 80%.

It's not like I was plagued with depression in the first place. But, boy, I've been a lot happier. I've been a lot lighter. I've known that for sure. I can tell that for sure. It's remarkable when you consume news on a daily basis. Like so many of us, I think, did. You know, when we were in lockdown,

what else we're going to do but watch TV? We're glued to it. They're like three major stories. lines that we were following and we caught everything else on the peripheral. But it's amazing what that does to your psyche when you watch it all day long. And so right now, I mean, after a year of paying attention, I really know nothing. I know nothing. What's going on?

But by being on social media and stuff, I mean, you can't help but catching the headlines here and there. But I've done almost no digging and we know headlines aren't the best source of information because usually they flip the headline somewhere deep into the story. But it's the headline that gets your attention. it's the headline that gets the clicks. But from those headlines, it's apparent that there are plenty of people, the right people specifically, or the wrong people,

depending on what side you're on, that hate Trump so badly that they can't think straight. And regardless of what you think of him, he's not the country's biggest issue. I mean, I doubt he'd even make the top 10 if he had to really make a list of what actually impacts your life on a daily basis. Anyway, this is not for that. But I was interested in this latest headline that came out this week to ban Trump from all real estate in New York City forever.

Plus a big fat nine figure fine. I'll admit my curiosity got the best of me. Like, what did this guy do? Like, what am I missing? So I went down the rabbit hole for you, so you don't have to. And to see if there was anything really here for investors like us to learn from. And my biggest questions initially were, I just like, okay, in this civil case, what was Trump actually charged with? Because I have no idea what he's charged with.

What has he been found guilty of, if anything? How's it going? What's it looking like for him? How did he gain? Where was his big benefit from what he's allegedly done? And then who was harmed by it all? Who got hurt? Because I haven't heard any of that stuff.

I just hear Trump's bad, right? Down with him. But, like, really, who has been hurt by what he's being charged with? And you have to know what he's being charged with to even draw that conclusion. So I did some digging in this civil case involving Trump. The charges are quite the pot boiler. So I'll break it down here. The charges.

Trump was charged with financial fiddling, so to speak. Some say it's very serious fiddling. I'm not going to make light of it. And I'm not going to try and pick one side or another. I just want to, like, look at this objectively as I can. and let's get as many details as I can. So I had to go through multiple sources of news to really pull this all together. So the New York Attorney General, Leticia James, has accused him of, and his company,

of inflating property values and his overall net worth. So I guess imagine someone playing a real-life game of monopoly, but they've got loaded dice is kind of the conclusion I've drawn here. And so the specific allegations against him revolve around fraudulent business practices related to the valuation of assets and financial states. Right. So here are the key points. One, inflating asset values.

So the core of this case, it's the accusation that Trump and his company, the Trump organization, artificially inflated the values of various assets. And this includes properties, golf courses, and other assets to secure more favorable loan terms, insurance coverage, and tax benefits. And I kind of read that and I'm like, okay, but don't you have an appraiser? when I go to apply for a loan or apply for a purchase and I'm getting a loan or a refinance or anything like that, they sound out an appraiser. And then I say, hey, you're wrong. And they say, tough nuggies.

No, we're not. You're wrong. So I'm kind of like, I don't understand that how he can inflate values to get better loan terms when all they do is deflate my values to give me worse loan terms when I go to work with the bank. So that's number one, inflating asset values. Number two, misrepresentation in financial statements. So Trump is alleged to have misrepresented the financial health of his business in statements given to banks and insurers and tax authorities. And so this involves presenting a significantly exaggerated picture of his net worth and the value of his assets. All right.

So I guess falsifying financial statements, I can see that. That's bad. Don't do that. Right. Particularly if taxes are involved because you don't want to. do that with the IRS, certainly not to any degree where they would raise an eyebrow, you know, that we all kind of play with our numbers each and every year. And, you know, we play in the gray area the best we can without breaking laws. So, I mean, that would be bad. The number three, the specific

charges. The specific legal charges in this case, they include fraud, allegedly engaging in fraudulent practices by providing false information about asset values. We talked about that, the misrepresentation. So go ahead and end. doctoring up his financial statements. And then the insurance and tax thing. So by inflating set values, there might be implications for insurance and tax fraud. So that's something else there.

Okay, I was like, okay, that's real. That's, I can see that. The lender thing I don't get. It was like, you know, you send out an appraiser and you determine how much I'm worked at. At the last loan we got, I had those, and my credit is in relatively good help. And I had to provide all these letters of explanation

because they found all of these things, and they certainly did their research, and I had to prove whether they were right or wrong, and there's that. Okay, so those are the three major things that he's accused of. Now, the impact of the alleged action. So these practices, if proven, could have allowed Trump and his company to secure loans on more favorable terms

than would have been possible with accurate evaluations, or they would have reduced his tax liabilities and potentially increased insurance coverage. Then the number five thing I wrote down, here, this civil versus criminal case. So it's important to note that these are civil allegations, not criminal ones. So the focus is on financial penalties and potential business restrictions rather than criminal liability.

Okay. So those are the charges and everything that kind of goes with that. So now is he guilty or not? And here's where it gets interesting because in a civil case like this, you know, they don't exactly talk about guilt as you do in criminal case. But the New York judge did find Trump, his company, and some executives liable for what seems like a decade-long shell game with property values and financial statements. So the judge has found him liable for that.

So then the next thing would be like, okay, how did he gain from this? Like, what did he really win? So if these accusations, if they hold water, Trump and his company could have gained significantly, And we're talking about getting sweet deals on loans and insurance by showing a fatter wallet than what might have actually been in there. It's like telling your high school reunion that you own a yacht when it's actually just a rowboat. So really just getting loans is what I'm seeing. And then I guess lower insurance premiums and maybe some tax benefits. And then my thing was like, who was harmed?

Because it was under the impression, I'm no lawyer. You all know that. I've said it a million times and made that disclaimer. But I thought there had to be like an injured. party. Like someone had to have been hurt for like charges to be brought up. So in cases like this, the victims aren't always standing in a lineup to do that to bring those charges against you. But generally, if you inflate your asset values to get better loan terms, the financial institutions giving those loans are not getting the full picture. So they think they're lending to a billionaire

with the Midas touch, not someone who's just juggling the books. So then I was thinking, okay, well, they have the potential, I guess, to be harmed, but have they been harmed? And so I wanted to find out if Trump had defaulted on any of his loans. And as of right now, there are no public records and no public reports indicating that Donald Trump has defaulted or is in default any of the loans referenced in this case. Now, I know he's filed bankruptcy before in the past, but that's the law. You're allowed to do that? that's not against the law filing bankruptcy.

Once you file bankruptcy, now it's all behind you and you get to start with this clean slate. I know bankruptcy laws are a little different now than they were like 10, 12, 15 years ago. But essentially, you get to like have all that go away and you start over. So anything that's current lending wise that's referenced in this case, he's in good standing on all of it. But it is important to note that loan default is a separate issue from the allegations in this case. This case is more about the methods used to acquire the loans and the representation of the assets value rather than the repayment of the loan themselves. So these are separate things. So it still kind of came down to like, okay, well, nobody's been hurt, right?

That's what I'm thinking. So if he's making the payments, who is the injured party? Is there one? Even if Trump or anyone in a similar situation doesn't default on the loans obtained through exaggeration, there are still potential injured parties in it, So this is what I found. One, the financial institutions. They provided loans based on misrepresented information. This could affect their risk assessments, their interest rates, and their financial health.

It's like lending someone money to buy a car thinking that they're a stable accountant, but they're actually a daredevil stunt driver. The risk profile, it's way off. And number two, market integrity. So such actions, if widespread, can skew market perceptions. Overvalued assets can lead to a distrable. distorted market affecting other investors, their pricing, and even the economy as a whole. So it's like everyone in the neighborhood saying that their house is worth double what it

actually is. It messes up the whole real estate scene if everyone is just claiming that a house is worth twice as much as what it is. So the market integrity. Number three, the third thing I found was the competitive disadvantage that he could get or someone in his situation could get. So other businesses or individuals who played by the rules, they might lose out on opportunities because they couldn't or wouldn't inflate their financial worth. So it's like running a race where one runner secretly uses a bicycle. Even if they don't crash, it's still unfair. So I get that.

And then number four, the legal and ethical standards. So if such behavior becomes rampant and unchecked, it undermines legal and ethical standards. It sets a precedent that truth in financial reporting isn't necessary for success, which can lead to a slippery slope of increasingly risky, or unethical behaviors in business, in the industry, in real estate. And then the fifth thing I found were the long-term implications when it comes to harm. So if these practices led to financial instability for the individual or company,

if it leads to that, it could have wider repercussions down the line, impacting employees, shareholders, and other stakeholders. So the trout tail today could lead to a whale of a problem tomorrow. So I guess one lie leads to the next. and they just get bigger and bigger and bigger. So even if there's no immediate default or financial collapse, the injured party could be the integrity of the financial system, the fairness of the market,

and the trust upon which a lot of economic activity is based. So it's like building a house on a foundation of sand. It might stand for a while and everything is fine, everyone's happy, but it's not as solid as it looks. All right. So then I was thinking, okay, I get all that. It all makes sense. So how did Trump get picked out for this investigation if this house, although it may be sitting on sand, is still fine and stable and everybody in the house is enjoying themselves and nobody outside of the house is getting hurt for the house being there?

How did he get picked out for this investigation? Well, the allegations in this particular case were made by the Attorney General of New York, Letitia James, and the why of it is rooted in her role in responsibilities as the state's top legal. officer. This is what I was reading. Here's the context. One, the role of the attorney general. They're responsible for enforcing state laws and protecting the public interests. And part of her job is to investigate and take legal action against fraudulent or illegal business practices. Two, in this case, James has alleged that Trump and his company engaged in fraudulent practices by inflating the value of their assets. So this was purportedly done to secure better long-term insurance benefits and tax advantage, all that stuff.

And essentially, the case revolves around whether Trump misrepresented the financial health and value of his assets for financial gain. So the attorney general's got to keep an eye on that. Then I was like, okay, what are the real still? Why? Him. What's the motivation for the allegations? So from a legal perspective, such actions are generally motivated by a duty to uphold the law

and protect the market and consumers from fraudulent practices. That's where the motivation should come from. And the AG's office may have seen these alleged actions as a significant distortion of financial truths impacting financial institutions and market integrity. So that's where the motivation should come. Is it from there? I don't know.

We can't prove motivation. We can't prove intent. We can't prove what's going on in someone's mind. But that's where they should be, the allegations should be coming from. and God, I hope that's where they are coming from. But we all have been in this little circus for the last few years, and we all have our ideas of where those motivations are coming from.

But that's where they should be coming from. And then for the broader context, the case fits into a broader pattern of scrutiny that Trump's business practices have attracted over the years. So there's history here. And high-profile business figures, especially those with substantial political influence, like being a former president,

I imagine, often come under close legal scrutiny. So all eyes on him just because of kind of who he is and regardless of what you think about him, even if you love him, you can't admit, he's kind of brought a lot of this, a lot of the spotlight onto himself. We'll be back with more right after this. Hey there, I've got something incredible to share with you today. I mean, it's a game changer, especially if you're skeptical or even have the slightest doubts about the ever-changing world of real estate investing.

I mean, imagine if you could jump ahead in time to see exactly what the next decade holds in real estate. Now, what if I told you that you can not only see it, but also be a master player in this future landscape? You see, I'm getting together with a small group of aspiring real estate investors like yourself next month at the all-new, Epic Intensive, the 48-hour year. Now, this isn't a seminar.

It's a time machine to your successful future in real estate. state, meaning if you knew what's about to take place over the next 10 years, you'll wish you started preparing a year ago. So in just 48 hours, I'm going to turn back the clock and get you all caught up with the proven plan, essential resources, and the convenient capital that you're going to need to leap a year ahead from where you stand today. And it's happening here in the heart of Vibrant Las Vegas, January 26th through the 27th, 2004. So this is your golden ticket to leap a year ahead. in just 48 hours. But wait, it gets better. If you're serious about your real estate investing, I'm seriously invested in you. How? Well, for the fast action takers, I'm covering your airfare

and hotel stay here in Vegas. I mean, think about it. You're getting the crystal ball for the next 10 years in real estate. You get to network with like-minded investors, and you get to experience hands-on transformative strategies all while enjoying the dynamic energy of Las Vegas. And the best part, The cost of getting here, it's on me. Now, I know it sounds too good to be true, but this is your moment. Whether you're a seasoned investor or you're just starting out, the Epic Intensive is where your ambitions turn into achievable goals. So don't let skepticism hold you back from a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

The time's ticking and spots are limited, and the plane tickets and hotel reservations are even more so. So get the details and claim your spot at Intensive-2024.com. Intensive 2024.com. Go there now. See you in Vegas. Hope is not a financial strategy.

Let's get back to work. So I started thinking, why are these civil allegations in the criminal ones? Because I really am looking at this like no harm, no foul. Don't we have bigger fish to fry? Is what he's being charged with?

are they against the law or are they just a violation of morals and ethics and you don't like his personality and his tweets and his overall character? Being a bad guy, not against the law, right? The allegations, the focus is on civil liability. This means the case is about seeking financial penalties and possibly imposing these business restrictions and rather than pursuing criminal sanctions like imprisoned. And so the potential for criminal implications, while this case, case as brought by the Attorney General is civil, it's worth noting that fraud and misrepresentation

can also be grounds for criminal charges under different circumstances. So if similar actions were pursued criminally, they could potentially lead to charges like criminal fraud, tax evasion, or insurance fraud. However, such criminal charges would require a separate criminal investigation and prosecution, typically by a district attorney or other criminal prosecution authority. And here's where the big he is, the burden of proof. Because we all know that Trump has been indicted for several things, right? Is indictment the right word? I mean, I know he's been impeached two or three times, hasn't he?

And I don't know what the burden of proof is there, but he's gotten off free and clear regardless of what that burden of proof was on all of those. They couldn't make anything stick. And it's really sad that that isn't more of the news. It's more the news is that he was impeached and not the news that he was impeached and they had nothing. Because they had nothing. They really did have nothing. And again, if you hate Trump and your blood's starting to boil right now, all I'm asking is just to have an open mind about it.

Oh my God, have an open mind about him. He's such a jerk. I know, but there's right and wrong and there's laws here. Did he break the laws or did he not? Is he guilty of something or is he not? It really comes down to none of us know. Like, we weren't there. It's amazing how much conviction people have from an opinion in an op-ed somewhere

or a group that they follow on Twitter or what Rachel Maddow had to say or what Tucker Carlson had to say. It's like, do you really know, is it something you're willing to die for and harm your neighbor for? And I don't know. I have my leanings, but I don't have a condom. one way or the other because I'm just a real estate investor who has a YouTube channel and a podcast and I buy and sell houses and I try to hold as many as I can and I really don't leave the confines of my office too often whether it's to go play with my son or whether it's to go home. So how would I know what's really going on up there?

We all have our suspicions, but we don't have the conviction. I mean, we shouldn't have the conviction on something we really do know nothing about, just something that we have a hunch for and if it's right or wrong or in alignment with our values. But we don't know. So in this, the burden of proof here, let me, I got off way off on a tangent there. But with a civil case, the burden of proof is via the preponderance of the evidence. So it's collectively taken the evidence and leaning one way or the other. Kind of like majority rules when it comes to the evidence. Do we have enough here to reasonably assume guilt or to reasonably determine that they're guilty?

there's that. And then, but criminally, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. So that means there has to be absolutely no doubt. And I think with everything that's going in our world, you have to have doubt. You have to, unless you are an insider, unless you were there and saw it or witnessed it, there's always death. So what this means is that while the actions in question could theoretically be criminal if pursued in a criminal court, the current civil case operates under different legal standards and objectives. All right. So as mom and pop real estate investors,

let's get back to real estate. Well, what can we learn from this? Because even though I went through and I really went through with an open mind and I tried to give everybody involved the benefit of the doubt, I'm still just kind of scratching my head like,

but nobody was hurt. And maybe, you know, maybe that's the part I'm missing. That's my total blind spot. But no one got scammed. No one has been defaulted on and nothing has been stolen from anybody. Nobody died. Nothing, right?

Nobody's been hurt. So I'm like, okay, but where's the lesson here as just private real estate investors like you and I? Because I really just don't see a lot here other than you don't want to piss off the people that have the ability to leverage so much authority over you. So what I did is I just took all my notes from this podcast that I've been loosely reading from and I plugged them into chat GPT just in case I was missing something. And I asked, chat, here's how I see it. This is all the research I've done. What am I supposed to learn here?

What am I missing? So this is what was chat's output. So for the everyday mom and pop real estate investor, the Trump case offers a few practical street smart lessons in navigating the real estate world where the lines between ambition and overreach can get blurry. So even chat to say this is kind of blurry, right? So one is stay within the lines of reality. So it's like fishing stories.

A little exaggeration might be common, but don't claim you caught a whale when it was just a trout. Look at that. They even took the notes, the metaphor I used in my notes and fed them right back to me. When it comes to property values, loans, and financial statements, keep it real. You might not have Trump's towers, but your reputation in the local market is your skyscraper. Don't let it crumble with all or with tall tails. So I'm down with that. Your reputation, yes, it is very important.

This can be a very small industry that we're in. Two, understand the risks of over-leveraging. So Trump's case, it's a cautionary tale about the perils of over-leveraging based on inflated asset values. So for smaller investors, the takeaway is clear. Leverage can be a powerful tool, but, like a chainsaw, handle with care, or you risk a financial blood back. Now, I agree with that. I'm not saying that that's incorrect. But Trump has done nothing as far as, like, over-leveraging hasn't hurt him because he's been paying his bills. But yes, you don't want to be over-leveraged because

if something happens to your income, then that could come crashing down on you and could be difficult to manage. Number three, ethics aren't just for philosophy class. So in the real world, ethics do matter. Sure, you might. not get a ticket for jaywalking, but in business, crossing ethical lines can tarnish your reputation, lead to legal troubles, or worse. It's like cheating a monopoly. You might win the game, but you'll lose your playing partners. All right, so that's kind of like number one at gate, right? Stay within the lines of reality. Number four, know the law and play it smart. That's exactly what I'm trying to find out here. What is the law here? The law can be a labyrinth.

It sure can't be. And ignorance isn't a get-out-of-jail-free card. I understand that. that's not a defense that I didn't know. So you want to understand the basic legalities of your dealings. It's okay to push for the best deal, but know where the line is. Think of it as driving. Speed a little bit, maybe, but don't run the red lights. Use some discretion. It's okay to play in the gray, but don't push it.

Very interesting that this is how it's responding. Number five, big fish, small pond. In the grand scheme, Trump's a whale in the ocean while mom and pop investors are more like, fish in a pond. The bigger you are, the harder you fall. As a smaller investor, your risks and mistakes might not make headlines, but they can still sink your boat. So yeah, you don't want your reputation or your persona, your brand. You don't want it too big because I can put a target on your back. But even on a smaller scale, it could still be an issue. Number six, relationships are gold in smaller markets, your word and your relationships can be worth more than a quick profit.

Build trust, play fair. And remember, in a small pond, Everyone knows each other, burn a bridge, and you might find the whole town on the other side. So same thing. It's just kind of keep saying the same thing over and over again. Really, there's no substance here. Even chat can't find it. All right. Last one.

Seven. Plan for the rainy days. Trump's empire could weather storms that would drown smaller investors. Diversify, save for a rainy day, and don't overextend. So Trump's empire could weather storms that would drown smaller investors. Let's remove Trump from that. Insert any other empire you'd like that they could weather storms

but could drown smaller investors. Aren't there a lot of people drowning right now that has no fault of Trump that has no evidence of Trump's doing and participation in the storm that so many of us are in right now? The recession, e-inflation, gosh, you name it. or all this stuff.

The wars, plural, right? Interesting take from our chat GPT, artificial intelligence friend. Right. So in essence, the lesson is to aim high but keep your feet on the ground. As a small investor, you might not make the evening news, but in your world, your reputation, ethics, and smart, informed decisions are your best assets. Played a long game and remember, slow and steady can win the race, especially when the hairs are busy tripping over their own feet.

So the conclusion is, the people that make. the rules, don't like the way that you play the game. Perhaps it's because they don't know how to play it like you do. So play the game, play it the best you can. Just don't rub it in anyone's face. I think Trump actually said those words in a debate with Hillary, didn't he? He said, I know the game is rigged. I play it just the same way all of your people do. And it will always be rigged because they don't want those loopholes and this game to disappear because they all benefit from it.

And so really, nothing, I guess, upsets me more than just blatant hypocrisy. And that's what I see here. Same thing I saw a year ago when I just made the decision to go on a news diet. I don't think there's a side to be on because I think both sides are guilty. And they just get mad when the other person wins

and is playing the game better than they are. So, no reason. for me to jump off this news diet wagon. I'm back on it. And nothing really of value here from my perspective. Maybe you got something out of this. Hopefully you did. But I really just see it as play the game, play it on us,

play it the best you can. And if you get ahead and you find a little bit of an edge and a little bit of advantage, don't rub it in anyone's face. That's what I see. Okay? Peace. God bless. Take care.

And that wraps up the epic show. If you found this episode valuable, who else do you know that might too? There's a really good chance you know someone else who would. And when their name comes to mind, please share it with them. And ask them to click the subscribe button when they get here and I'll take great care of them. God loves you and so do I. Health, peace, blessings and success to you. I'm Matt Terrio.

Living the dream. Yeah, yeah, we got the cash flow. You didn't know, home for us, we got the cash flow. This podcast is a part of the C-suite radio network. For more top business podcasts, visit c-sweetradio.com.