Why does it matter if RG was LKs employee? He was also MBs employee! LOL
No he wasn’t. He was closer to contractor.
13 Likes
He wasn’t MBs employee because he was paid in kind and didn’t get a W2?
Do you think he got a W2 from LK?
No idea but he testified she paid him and paid his bills. Under oath in the criminal trial.
26 Likes
Oh really? Didn’t LK receive reduced prices for board and training of her horses, as a result of RG rendering services to MB?
Why was that? Why didn’t MB just compensate RG directly?
I think I’ve got it. If RG was actually LKs dedicated employee, then having him do some work for MB might result in MB providing services to LK (board and training of extra horse) as a form of compensation. An arrangement where professional services were essentially traded.
3 Likes
And the win of the Interwebz, possibly forever, goes to @ekat!
Very well done ekat, very well done!!!
17 Likes
Will someone please hit the needle on the record player so CH’s incredibly incessant weird argument move on?
Maybe the mods can help her understand what @ekat has so patiently explained, even with preschool art! No one here is going to say Lauren Kanarek is going to be awarded one cent until depositions are taken and the trials are closer to beginning!
Everyone remembers record players and needles stuck on scratches, right?
18 Likes
Yes, MB had a sloppy barter arrangement with no written contract in which RGs labor was compensated by MB providing board and training for an extra horse of LKs.
I would not consider RG an employee of MB. But saying RG was an employee of LKs is even more ludicrous.
Is this another sexist thing? Would you consider a stay at home mother or housewife whose bills are paid by the working-for-money husband or boyfriend an “employee” of the boyfriend?
2 Likes
I honestly don’t think Perry Mason, Matlock, or Vinnie Gambini can pull enough rabbits out of multiple hats to get the Kanareks out of the hole they put themselves in with their FTB plan!
11 Likes
But RG said it. Under oath. During the criminal trial. Does that make him ludicrous?
26 Likes
Oh yeah, there too! On the internet, RG said it.
11 Likes
Yeah, LK personally threatened me after I had the audacity to post that she might want to refrain from posting until the criminal trial was done.
Only one of us is still here posting, and it ain’t her!
34 Likes
RG, himself, said under oath he worked for Lauren Kanarek! Please stop arguing with everyone. Even with several ignoring you for over 24 hours, you’ve doubled down on your argumentative posts.
14 Likes
I just want to point out….if you take the rumor as true that LK is the one behind everything written by RG on FB….you can see she can write somewhat rationally. In fact, when you take all the RG/JES FB comments together, it presents a familiar picture.
9 Likes
The comments by “RG” on Facebook certainly did not match his vocabulary on the witness stand at the trial.
5 Likes
4 Likes
My whole life has been devoted to becoming Consigliere. Well, when I am not out cutting (people) that is!
11 Likes
First off… Are you calling me a sexist?
I’m pretty sure that’s against the community guidelines that cover the forums.
Second… if there was a “sloppy” barter arrangement between MB and LK, aren’t they both responsible for that?
Third, if a stay at home mother is married, then the income her husband makes from his professional career outside of the home is technically considered joint income in most situations. Therefore he isn’t actually paying the household bills. The household bills are getting covered from money that the married couple has a joint claim to.
I can’t speak to a situation involving a boyfriend and a stay at home mom though.
Any other questions CH?
22 Likes
