Trump Ordered To Pay $364 Million In Civil Fraud Case As Judge Finds Ex-President Knowingly Committed Fraud

[Ouroboros]

There's nothing in your post but partisan propaganda. You don;t even bother to attempt to support any point in your post.

Wow, a short "post post," in which you don't reel off tons of irrelevant data. Did you get the flu or something?

 

[The Hairy Fiddler]

Wow, a short "post post," in which you don't reel off tons of irrelevant data. Did you get the flu or something?

Ir's now up to 182 pages of your bullshit arguments. Trump is guilty of fraud...breaking laws and all that. Deal with it.

 

[ElChupacabra]

It's so old and seldom used, James had to dust it off to use it against Trump. The fact that is so seldom invoked indicates that the business practices deemed "fraud" have usually been winked at in a major business city like New York.

But a law nonetheless, and it was used to hold someone accountable who was clearly financially benefitting from fraudulent behavior.

Irrelevant, because her prosecution would have been disproportionate to the theoretical crime at any time. But she would not have done this except to take advantage of the political situation.

It's not theoretical though, since there is quantifiable financial benefit to Trump from his misrepresentations.

No, James and Engoron failed to demonstrate that their valuations were superior to those of the Trump side, and that's a necessity in invoking the relevant laws.

Not really, because as the testimony from the bankers revealed, they handle over valuations by adjusting accordingly. So it's clear that the banking industry found its own way to protect itself, but that doesn't benefit other borrowers or the market.

The failure remains yours, but not that of the Democrat Party, since their illegitimate suit will accomplish its main purpose, to drain Trump's resources during his campaign.

Incorrect, and mainly because you've been left with being an advocate for fraudulent behavior.

 

[ElChupacabra]

That the Democratic Party justifies their crimes on a regular basis is old news.

I'm not sure if that has any meaning when coming from someone who advocates overlooking fraudulent behavior.

 

[ClaraD]

They found cocaine in the WH last year. Hunter's clearly branching out, so I call him "Cocaine Head" these days.

When Biden as Veep takes actions that benefit his son's business dealings, that's far more of a "quid pro quo" than Trump encouraging a foreign leader to investigate potential corruption in his country, especially since Trump made no stipulations as to what verdict he expected to be rendered or the consequences of disobedience to the "deal."

Yes in a public area where the public frequently is located and it was less than $10 worth

 

[marduc]

They found cocaine in the WH last year. Hunter's clearly branching out, so I call him "Cocaine Head" these days.

When Biden as Veep takes actions that benefit his son's business dealings, that's far more of a "quid pro quo" than Trump encouraging a foreign leader to investigate potential corruption in his country, especially since Trump made no stipulations as to what verdict he expected to be rendered or the consequences of disobedience to the "deal."

They found cocaine in the white house and Hunter had a drug problem, ergo it was Hunters cocaine.

Is that what you are trying to assert? It reads as if it is, if it is not please do clarify what you are implying.

 

[Ouroboros]

Ir's now up to 182 pages of your bullshit arguments. Trump is guilty of fraud...breaking laws and all that. Deal with it.

Most of those 182 pages consist of BS Mad Lib arguments, which all come down to, "Democrats can weaponize the law when they feel like it."

Look, Trump's been hauled before courts before this, and he's been fined before this. I've never pretended he's an innocent angel. But only a naif could possibly believe that this victimless crime was prosecuted in order to undermine a political candidate, and this is definitely proven by the judge's assignment of a ruinous fine in an election year.

 

[Ouroboros]

But a law nonetheless, and it was used to hold someone accountable who was clearly financially benefitting from fraudulent behavior.

To hold a political candidate to an unreasonable standard of penalization in order to sabotage his candidacy.

It's not theoretical though, since there is quantifiable financial benefit to Trump from his misrepresentations.

It's a theoretical crime because there was no victim.

Not really, because as the testimony from the bankers revealed, they handle over valuations by adjusting accordingly. So it's clear that the banking industry found its own way to protect itself, but that doesn't benefit other borrowers or the market.

The bankers weren't deceived, as in the case of the judge's own counter example, Bernie Madoff. They had the ability to check Trump's representations and to simply decline his business if they disagreed with his valuations. As Trump pointed out, anyone selling a property, in NY or anywhere, will represent the property on the high side. Crazy Mad Libs don't care about the banks or the state losing money. They just want to Get Trump.

Incorrect, and mainly because you've been left with being an advocate for fraudulent behavior.

I'm an opponent of fraudulent Mad Lib lawfare, nothing more.

 

[Ouroboros]

I'm not sure if that has any meaning when coming from someone who advocates overlooking fraudulent behavior.

That's my line in reverse. High moralizing about victimless crimes has little substance coming from politicians and their followers who practice a double standard of lawfare.

 

[Ouroboros]

Yes in a public area where the public frequently is located and it was less than $10 worth

That's probably why Cocaine Head Biden didn't miss it.

 

[Ouroboros]

They found cocaine in the white house and Hunter had a drug problem, ergo it was Hunters cocaine.

Is that what you are trying to assert? It reads as if it is, if it is not please do clarify what you are implying.

I'm asserting that the quid pro quo of Biden defending his drug fiend son's business dealings in Ukraine makes much more sense than the idiot Dem narrative that Trump blackmailed a foreign dignitary to stage-manage a phony corruption investigation. All clear now?

 

[Hypothetical]

What if NOBODY told the truth about the value of their property? OK with that?

fascist don has 4 bankruptcies in his past. There is plenty of risk in a loan to him. If the value of his collateral is inflated and the bank accepts it as stated, they will not charge enough in interest to cover their true risk.

What is wrong with fascist don just telling the truth, like most other folks? That is what he should have done, just tell the truth.

THE BANK does its own assessment, every single time. IF THEY are ok giving the loan based on that, then why is there a problem?

 

[ElChupacabra]

To hold a political candidate to an unreasonable standard of penalization in order to sabotage his candidacy.

Is it unreasonable for someone to return ill gotten gain as per the letter of the law?

It's a theoretical crime because there was no victim.

It's not a theoretical crime though, because the actions taken were in violation of fraud law. If you commit a crime but there's no victim doesn't absolve you of committing the crime.

The bankers weren't deceived, as in the case of the judge's own counter example, Bernie Madoff. They had the ability to check Trump's representations and to simply decline his business if they disagreed with his valuations. As Trump pointed out, anyone selling a property, in NY or anywhere, will represent the property on the high side. Crazy Mad Libs don't care about the banks or the state losing money. They just want to Get Trump.

Sure they were. What we learned from their testimony is that bankers assume there will be over valuations from those applying for loans and listing their assets as collateral and adjust accordingly; what they refer to is as a "haircut". That is a work around indicating there is this kind of fraud going on, and banks have chosen how to protect themselves but not others. Where this is relevant is that people who cheat on their loan applications will skew the market because they will receive favorable rates through deception and impact those reporting accurately.

I'm an opponent of fraudulent Mad Lib lawfare, nothing more.

Then you're already at a disadvantage because you've established a rather silly bias.

 

[ElChupacabra]

That's my line in reverse. High moralizing about victimless crimes has little substance coming from politicians and their followers who practice a double standard of lawfare.

I'd be curious to know what percentage of "law and order" you support.


Is it ok for some to get away with crimes while others don't? If you're advocating for Trump to be spared for committing fraud, why not for your average joe when they apply for a loan?

 

[brianpatrick]

I'm asserting that the quid pro quo of Biden defending his drug fiend son's business dealings in Ukraine makes much more sense than the idiot Dem narrative that Trump blackmailed a foreign dignitary to stage-manage a phony corruption investigation. All clear now?

Glad you clarified it was only the “idiot Dems” you are talking about because there are so few of them.

 

[Peter]

Most of those 182 pages consist of BS Mad Lib arguments, which all come down to, "Democrats can weaponize the law when they feel like it."

Look, Trump's been hauled before courts before this, and he's been fined before this. I've never pretended he's an innocent angel. But only a naif could possibly believe that this victimless crime was prosecuted in order to undermine a political candidate, and this is definitely proven by the judge's assignment of a ruinous fine in an election year.

Trump claims to be a billionaire, how is this fine ruinous unless he's lying about his wealth?

 

[post]

To hold a political candidate to an unreasonable standard of penalization in order to sabotage his candidacy.

It's a theoretical crime because there was no victim.

The bankers weren't deceived, as in the case of the judge's own counter example, Bernie Madoff. They had the ability to check Trump's representations and to simply decline his business if they disagreed with his valuations. As Trump pointed out, anyone selling a property, in NY or anywhere, will represent the property on the high side. Crazy Mad Libs don't care about the banks or the state losing money. They just want to Get Trump.


I'm an opponent of fraudulent Mad Lib lawfare, nothing more.

Trump, the confederacy, and you are the real victims.

In your insular world, taking the Fifth 440X, refusing to be responsive in the discovery phase, filing a tsunami of frivolous and or repetitive motions and or appeals do not influence the court to regard the defendant's pleadings in the worst possible light.

Why did News Corp. provide Dominion with internal communications resulting in a $760 ,million settlement? Because the consequences of the Trump
nonresponsiveness have to be more severe than results of cooperating in the adversarial process!

New York business fraud lawsuit against the Trump Organization - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Ambig]

But only a naif could possibly believe that this victimless crime was prosecuted in order to undermine a political candidate, and this is definitely proven by the judge's assignment of a ruinous fine in an election year.

Trump should time his crimes better... so the judgment doesn't come down during his campaign.

That's on him.

 

[post]

I'd be curious to know what percentage of "law and order" you support.


Is it ok for some to get away with crimes while others don't? If you're advocating for Trump to be spared for committing fraud, why not for your average joe when they apply for a loan?

Trump and other white nationalists are unaccountable if they cloak themselves in imaginary politically protected exemption supported by
mob lawyer tactics.

 

[Ambig]

THE BANK does its own assessment, every single time.

Uh... no. The bank is unable to do an assessment on a guy with 500 shell companies.

You should try understanding what actually happened.

 

[mike2810]

THE BANK does its own assessment, every single time. IF THEY are ok giving the loan based on that, then why is there a problem?

Trump claimed one of his residence was 33,000 sqft. on a loan when in fact it is more like 11,000 sq.

The question becomes should Trump owe back property taxes on the 33,000 sqft residence as he claimed on the loan?

To answer your question the problem with the fraud case is maybe Trump did not pay the proper tax amount by using misleading numbers.

Should all people use whatever numbers they want when applying for a loan?

 

[Hypothetical]

Trump claimed one of his residence was 33,000 sqft. on a loan when in fact it is more like 11,000 sq.

The question becomes should Trump owe back property taxes on the 33,000 sqft residence as he claimed on the loan?

To answer your question the problem with the fraud case is maybe Trump did not pay the proper tax amount by using misleading numbers.

Should all people use whatever numbers they want when applying for a loan?

not sure how it matters when the bank can assess the property themselves, OR knowingly give the loan with the risk of using someone's stated wealth and value.

These banks made tons of money off of this venture. The only people it matters to are the ones out to get Trump. It is not like he is lying to little old ladies about snake oil to take their hard earned cash... the banks can assess the risk properly in every case, if they choose to do so, OR they can choose to accept the risk on name and provided numbers only.

all of these real estate moguls fudge numbers at times. Stop that and less money will flow in these cities.

 

[mike2810]

not sure how it matters when the bank can assess the property themselves, OR knowingly give the loan with the risk of using someone's stated wealth and value.

These banks made tons of money off of this venture. The only people it matters to are the ones out to get Trump. It is not like he is lying to little old ladies about snake oil to take their hard earned cash... the banks can assess the risk properly in every case, if they choose to do so, OR they can choose to accept the risk on name and provided numbers only.

all of these real estate moguls fudge numbers at times. Stop that and less money will flow in these cities.

I am less concerned on how much the Banks made as I am with Trump potentially not paying his fair share of taxes.

Said it another thread. If he claims his residence is 33,000 sqft. then pay the taxes on such.

 

[WorldWatcher]

not sure how it matters when the bank can assess the property themselves, OR knowingly give the loan with the risk of using someone's stated wealth and value.

We're not talking about property as collateral to secure the principal of the loan/investment.

This has to do about falsifying legal business records to inflate net worth to achieve lower financing rates.

Take for example a home mortgage:

• Principal - based on the value of the home.
• Interest Rate - based on income, net worth, and credit score.

The principal and rate at which money is borrowed are two different things.

The charges are in falsifying legal business records to get lower rates than would normally be available.

These banks made tons of money off of this venture. The only people it matters to are the ones out to get Trump. It is not like he is lying to little old ladies about snake oil to take their hard earned cash... the banks can assess the risk properly in every case, if they choose to do so, OR they can choose to accept the risk on name and provided numbers only.

Hmmm two words come to mind...

..... ..... ..... ..... Trump University

WW

 

[WillyPete]

not sure how it matters when the bank can assess the property themselves, OR knowingly give the loan with the risk of using someone's stated wealth and value.

These banks made tons of money off of this venture. The only people it matters to are the ones out to get Trump. It is not like he is lying to little old ladies about snake oil to take their hard earned cash... the banks can assess the risk properly in every case, if they choose to do so, OR they can choose to accept the risk on name and provided numbers only.

That's all true (let's say, anyhow) and there's ALSO laws about lying in those disclosures that have nothing to do with the banks.

Trump took on those responsibilities. He probably shouldn't have done that if he couldn't abide by them.

all of these real estate moguls fudge numbers at times. Stop that and less money will flow in these cities.

Oh no! New York will see less unlawful investment?!

Maybe Trump can dedicate the rest of his life to exposing the rest of them?