News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

networkpro

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
There's an interesting dissection of Disney's suit on Youtube by the Legal Mindset channel who actually has a specialization in Florida Special District and real property law and has practiced as such. He brings up the point that if it's Disney, not the former district, that is asserting this as a First Amendment case that due to the disclosures on the bond debt they are committing securities fraud. Disney, in its filing, admits that the replacement for RCID is the current legal authority for that district.

The matter of the Bonds is what will cause Disney the most problems in the legal court system, not the court of public opinion where anything can bring up as "evidence" and shills can pump out as many "ground swell opinion pieces" as funds as made available to produce and publish them.
 

Surferboy567

Well-Known Member
Eh, being sued doesn’t really mean anything. In certain jobs you’re pretty much guaranteed to be sued and governor of a state is one of those. I’d probably be more worried if a governor wasn’t being sued.
No, that is not what I am saying.

He is being sued, he should not keep saying things to make himself look more guilty. The ship has sailed on that I guess.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
There's an interesting dissection of Disney's suit on Youtube by the Legal Mindset channel who actually has a specialization in Florida Special District and real property law and has practiced as such. He brings up the point that if it's Disney, not the former district, that is asserting this as a First Amendment case that due to the disclosures on the bond debt they are committing securities fraud. Disney, in its filing, admits that the replacement for RCID is the current legal authority for that district.

The matter of the Bonds is what will cause Disney the most problems in the legal court system, not the court of public opinion where anything can bring up as "evidence" and shills can pump out as many "ground swell opinion pieces" as funds as made available to produce and publish them.
🤣 The guy we’ve already laughed at several time before? Who overstates his credentials and gets basic facts wrong?
 

Prince-1

Well-Known Member
There's an interesting dissection of Disney's suit on Youtube by the Legal Mindset channel who actually has a specialization in Florida Special District and real property law and has practiced as such. He brings up the point that if it's Disney, not the former district, that is asserting this as a First Amendment case that due to the disclosures on the bond debt they are committing securities fraud. Disney, in its filing, admits that the replacement for RCID is the current legal authority for that district.

The matter of the Bonds is what will cause Disney the most problems in the legal court system, not the court of public opinion where anything can bring up as "evidence" and shills can pump out as many "ground swell opinion pieces" as funds as made available to produce and publish them.

Listening to a Youtube lawyer is almost as good as taking advice from Disney bus drivers.
 

GBAB1973

Well-Known Member
There's an interesting dissection of Disney's suit on Youtube by the Legal Mindset channel who actually has a specialization in Florida Special District and real property law and has practiced as such. He brings up the point that if it's Disney, not the former district, that is asserting this as a First Amendment case that due to the disclosures on the bond debt they are committing securities fraud. Disney, in its filing, admits that the replacement for RCID is the current legal authority for that district.

The matter of the Bonds is what will cause Disney the most problems in the legal court system, not the court of public opinion where anything can bring up as "evidence" and shills can pump out as many "ground swell opinion pieces" as funds as made available to produce and publish them.

When this guy called those who support Disney "simps", he pretty much outed himself here.
 

mikejs78

Premium Member
There's an interesting dissection of Disney's suit on Youtube by the Legal Mindset channel who actually has a specialization in Florida Special District and real property law and has practiced as such. He brings up the point that if it's Disney, not the former district, that is asserting this as a First Amendment case that due to the disclosures on the bond debt they are committing securities fraud. Disney, in its filing, admits that the replacement for RCID is the current legal authority for that district.

The matter of the Bonds is what will cause Disney the most problems in the legal court system, not the court of public opinion where anything can bring up as "evidence" and shills can pump out as many "ground swell opinion pieces" as funds as made available to produce and publish them.

🤣 The guy we’ve already laughed at several time before? Who overstates his credentials and gets basic facts wrong?

Yeah, that guy has not been right about anything regarding this case since it started a year ago....
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
There's an interesting dissection of Disney's suit on Youtube by the Legal Mindset channel who actually has a specialization in Florida Special District and real property law and has practiced as such. He brings up the point that if it's Disney, not the former district, that is asserting this as a First Amendment case that due to the disclosures on the bond debt they are committing securities fraud. Disney, in its filing, admits that the replacement for RCID is the current legal authority for that district.

The matter of the Bonds is what will cause Disney the most problems in the legal court system, not the court of public opinion where anything can bring up as "evidence" and shills can pump out as many "ground swell opinion pieces" as funds as made available to produce and publish them.

You shouldn't trust anything that guy says. It's wildly skewed political opinions; not actual legal analysis.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
He brings up the point that if it's Disney, not the former district, that is asserting this as a First Amendment case that due to the disclosures on the bond debt they are committing securities fraud. Disney, in its filing, admits that the replacement for RCID is the current legal authority for that district.
Disney is the targeted entity of first amendment claim and that CFTOD is the current current legal authority for that district are not contradictory statements. Also, CFTOD also isn't a replacement for RCID, it's a rename of RCID. The legal authority entity for the district didn't change at all.

Is there some imaginary gotcha hiding in there?
Are people just making stuff up now and saying it's so?
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
I SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR NO DRAMA THIS WEEK.
MostDrama.jpg
 

CaptainAmerica

Premium Member


Source: Scott Gustin

This guy is flat out not smart, I don’t care where he graduated from he is being sued why would he say this.

He just gave Disney more well deserved ammo, by basically saying they did it to punish.

???

He didn't JUST say this, he said it a year ago.

It was still stupid to say, but it's not like he said it yesterday.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom