Advent Talk

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

If you feel a post was made in violation in one or more of the Forum Rules of Advent Talk, then please click on the link provided and give a reason for reporting the post.  The Admin Team will then review the reported post and the reason given, and will respond accordingly.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation  (Read 39234 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Snoopy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3056
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #45 on: March 30, 2009, 06:14:01 PM »


When I was there Larry Ewing reported to Danny.
Logged

Stan

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #46 on: March 30, 2009, 07:01:45 PM »

Was Larry the Treasurer, or similar title? that would make sense to report to the president, but I was wondering if Danny had given a lot of direction to each of the accounting staff,  things like how to receipt income and where it was allocated or what codes to be put on every invoice,  that kind of thing..
« Last Edit: March 30, 2009, 07:12:54 PM by Stan »
Logged

Snoopy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3056
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #47 on: March 30, 2009, 07:14:02 PM »


From what I observed, Danny's influence was alive and well in the accounting department.  I'll leave it at that.

Logged

Stan

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #48 on: March 30, 2009, 08:04:23 PM »

ok Thanks...  :)
Logged

Murcielago

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1274
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #49 on: March 30, 2009, 08:14:47 PM »

ok Thanks...  :)

I want to welcome you to AT, Stan! I'm glad you (the godfather of SDA chat) are here and look forward to seeing some great discussions. I hope you enjoy your time here!
Logged

Stan

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #50 on: March 30, 2009, 08:19:59 PM »

Can I be a GodFather if I am Danish?

;)
Logged

Murcielago

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1274
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #51 on: March 30, 2009, 08:52:08 PM »

Can I be a GodFather if I am Danish?

;)

But of course! You must say, "You neva come to me and say 'Godafadda.' you don't invite to yoa house for a 'Danish.'" (instead of 'coffee.')

Also remember to say "Leave da gun, take da Danish."  ;)
Logged

Murcielago

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1274
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #52 on: March 30, 2009, 09:52:41 PM »

If you haven't watched "The Godfather" you wont get any of that. Just so ya know.
Logged

anyman

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #53 on: March 30, 2009, 10:56:01 PM »

It means that Fran is still living in another reality. She has only her skewed interpretations to base her accusations upon. She denies facts in favor of her own theories. Facts have proven her accusations false, but that is of no account to her.



Any Man;

Not only that, but in that same year the auditors found $2.43+ MILLION dollars not posted!  Then the next year they found 1.7+ MILLION not posted!  This is not good!


So Fran what does that mean?  was it the constant stating of accrual funds disagreement that happens so often with auditors?  Was it funds hiding illegal?
Was it items that should have been receipted in one year and was put in the next year?

Was their fraud involved?  Was it clerical errors? Were the corrections done?  Where their offsetting expenses also posted in error in the same year? Was Danny in Charge of the Accounting department as well? I am asking that one because I do not know.

???
Logged

Stan

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #54 on: March 31, 2009, 04:04:43 AM »

If you haven't watched "The Godfather" you wont get any of that. Just so ya know.
I should watch it sometime,  :) i have never seen the star wars movies either.
Logged

tinka

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1495
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #55 on: March 31, 2009, 07:09:52 AM »

If you haven't watched "The Godfather" you wont get any of that. Just so ya know.
I should watch it sometime,  :) i have never seen the star wars movies either.


laugh, laugh  Years ago when the first commercials came on of the Star Wars and I saw the stupid hairdos and futuristic non reality clothes I just figured people quite reading the comics and it picked up from there. I never really read the comics, because I felt it just idiot stuff. except for one that I would venture to and that was Blondi and Dagwood. With tv it was the I love lucy show, Laural & Hardy.  Now when it comes to the "Godfather".  I did do that one. Sometimes I had to shut my eyes to parts. It is really hard core. But after reading the Great Controversary and knowing the time the Godfather was about I ventured into that one. To my amazement the core of the story (not at first) but towards the end show the connection of mob to the church and how long it has never changed. Exactly all the reasoning and raw details that EGW describes in GC in dramatic details to the T.
It gave more then great understanding why and how the mob did the acts and then went to confessions.

 My poor beautiful good mother never knew she married one of those until too late. As he also was a hard worker in the steel industry. It was hidden from me until years later and I lost my father very early. All I knew is that he did not come home anymore and romp room to room with the puppy.  I have never understood why I was born into this pattern as I watched all my new rural friends in first grade and up with all having their mothers and fathers and happy farm families like in the 40's and 50's. My memories are my daddy had great big laugh beautiful teeth and dimples.  Good looking and almost a twin to Clark Gable. Proud of me and showed me off to everyone. Always white polished shoes and dressed handsome and was.   My mother said I had over 150 little dresses on my first birthday. I knew he loved me.

I attached very quickly knowing that I really did have a "Father in Heaven" for me to survive. Yes, I ventured into the "Godfather" It was horrific reality. So you see I have extra Bond with my "Father in Heaven" and I feel so imperfect to have Him.  The Godfather will take a whole day to watch in 4 parts. Memory brings tears all my life.
Guess that is why I really mouth off on the sin that these documents, actions and extravaganza that is and was in plain sight that have been brought into view. The reality of it all is History of facts. It has happened to all our dismay. Why should it be hidden so the mob can continue?? What difference is there here of the continuing same pattern of the "Godfather" ????? The money pattern!!!! Soon it shall be gone in an hour and Eternity lost.

« Last Edit: March 31, 2009, 09:09:58 AM by tinka »
Logged

Bob Pickle

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4061
    • Pickle Publishing
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #56 on: March 31, 2009, 09:05:58 AM »

It means that Fran is still living in another reality. She has only her skewed interpretations to base her accusations upon. She denies facts in favor of her own theories. Facts have proven her accusations false, but that is of no account to her.

How then do you explain that she was correct in what she said about Tammy having a store? That right there proves that Fran is right at least some of the time, if not most of the time.
Logged

Gailon Arthur Joy

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1539
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #57 on: April 15, 2009, 09:21:53 PM »

It means that Fran is still living in another reality. She has only her skewed interpretations to base her accusations upon. She denies facts in favor of her own theories. Facts have proven her accusations false, but that is of no account to her.

How then do you explain that she was correct in what she said about Tammy having a store? That right there proves that Fran is right at least some of the time, if not most of the time.

It is obvious that these vast "adversarial" discussions require "resolution". 3ABN had a chance and watched the evidence erode their entire case into the gutter as truth revealed itself ever more frequently WHILE the discovery built heavilly against the liars and the pilferer at 3ABN. THEY PROMPTLY DISMISSED TO AVOID THE TRUTH and this after devisive board meetings regarding accountability and governance. This after IRS and Remnant REVELATIONS...don't you just love REVELATIONS!!!!

THEREFORE: It is clear that there is a need for the reviving of the adversarial forum in courts of competent jurisdiction. THE PROPER HOME FOR "ADVERSARIAL" PROCESS!!! The time is ripe and the essential events are nearly fulfilled.

Let the truth be discovered!!! Let the litigation be resurrected!!! Here, Here!!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter
Logged

Stan

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 148
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #58 on: May 09, 2009, 09:59:10 AM »

Any Man;

Not only that, but in that same year the auditors found $2.43+ MILLION dollars not posted!  Then the next year they found 1.7+ MILLION not posted!  This is not good!


So Fran what does that mean?  was it the constant stating of accrual funds disagreement that happens so often with auditors?  Was it funds hiding illegal?
Was it items that should have been receipted in one year and was put in the next year?

Was their fraud involved?  Was it clerical errors? Were the corrections done?  Where their offsetting expenses also posted in error in the same year? Was Danny in Charge of the Accounting department as well? I am asking that one because I do not know.

???

Fran I am still waiting for your self proclaimed expert opinion on this question.

There are several organizations that say, "we will wait for the auditors to make the accrued adjustments on income and expenses"

Please respond to my questions.
Logged

Snoopy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3056
Re: Cindy Conard on the IRS investigation
« Reply #59 on: May 09, 2009, 01:48:23 PM »

Any Man;

Not only that, but in that same year the auditors found $2.43+ MILLION dollars not posted!  Then the next year they found 1.7+ MILLION not posted!  This is not good!


So Fran what does that mean?  was it the constant stating of accrual funds disagreement that happens so often with auditors?  Was it funds hiding illegal?
Was it items that should have been receipted in one year and was put in the next year?

Was their fraud involved?  Was it clerical errors? Were the corrections done?  Where their offsetting expenses also posted in error in the same year? Was Danny in Charge of the Accounting department as well? I am asking that one because I do not know.

???

Fran I am still waiting for your self proclaimed expert opinion on this question.

There are several organizations that say, "we will wait for the auditors to make the accrued adjustments on income and expenses"

Please respond to my questions.


 :ROFL: :ROFL:  I'm thinking you might want to re-read the standard audit report!!  Hhmm - who exactly is responsible for those financial statements anyway...??  Hhmm...  Could it be...the auditors??  Hhmm...  Could it be...the Director of Finance??  Hhmm...  Could it be...MANAGEMENT??  Hhmm...



Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up