[W:778] (Bloomberg Law) Trump Bond Reduced to $175 Million as He Appeals NY Fine

[stealthycat]

So if a fraudster can steal $2M, then it's a good deal for him... not to mention stealing $450M.

You want to live in a country where people have an incentive to steal?

Not me.

who stole 450 million ?

 

[Ambig]

Your continued dishonesty on this front tells me everything I need to know about your integrity on this topic.

I was arguing evolution with a poster once, when he ridiculed the idea that all life is descended from single-celled organisms. What a crazy notion! Insane!

When I questioned his education in biology, he claimed that actually his focus of study at university was in biological sciences.

Pretty sure this poster and that poster went under the same screen name.

Make of that what you will.

 

[Ambig]

I'm giving you all I got buddy. Trump fudged numbers, he should be fined. That's it.

Thank goodness you are not a person of authority in law enforcement.

 

[stealthycat]

First of all, why do you keep using the stupid term "fudging"? It was flat out fraud. And no, the fine you're suggesting is a joke.

so why didn't the banks reports and sue on this alledged "fraud" ??

 

[Athanasius68]

No evidence. How much exactly was paid to who exactly for what exactly.

Vague insinuations of "millions" finding a roundabout way into Joe Bidens hands for "influence " doesn't even amount to a specific allegation.

Maybe that's why the story constantly changes and the goalposts are always shifting. If there's never a concrete allegation- much less an charges - then it remains whatever you want it to be in the moment. Schrodinger's kickback scandal that both is and isn't at the same time.

It's laughable how flimsy thus conspiracy theory is, yet its adherents are so obstinate about it.

Talk about double standards here.

You are demanding that specific criminal acts of Mr. Biden be identified, and then be tied to specific criminal statutes that he supposedly violated.

Yet in Trumps DC prosecution, Smith has tied NO specific criminal acts of Trump, to any specific statute he supposedly violated. All Smith has said is that Trump made some false of election fraud and false claims of the authority of the VP in the counting of electoral votes.

 

[Ambig]

who stole 450 million ?

Trump stole around $350M, I think. But now the interest clock is ticking, as it should be.

 

[Ambig]

so why didn't the banks reports and sue on this alledged "fraud" ??

Lots of possibilities. It could be fear of vengeance from a future POTUS. It could be that they were trying to buy influence from a future POTUS.

But no one likes to sue. It's a hassle. Most people just take their licks and move on. Banks especially tend to do that.

 

[stealthycat]

Trump stole around $350M, I think. But now the interest clock is ticking, as it should be.

link to that please - I had no idea Trump stole money. Was it in $100 bills or ?? What denominations? Or maybe bitcoins ?

truth is, there was no theft. He borrowed money from a bank after the bank looked at everything and wrote a deal they were comfortable with. He repaid the loan.

that's the truth isn't it ?

 

[stealthycat]

Lots of possibilities. It could be fear of vengeance from a future POTUS. It could be that they were trying to buy influence from a future POTUS.

But no one likes to sue. It's a hassle. Most people just take their licks and move on. Banks especially tend to do that.

ok so you don't know - I didn't think you did

but for giggles ... give me one example of a bank having a loan repaid in full and later suing the borrower because of an inflated asset prior to the loan

any examples? any ?

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

Lots of possibilities. It could be fear of vengeance from a future POTUS. It could be that they were trying to buy influence from a future POTUS.

But no one likes to sue. It's a hassle. Most people just take their licks and move on. Banks especially tend to do that.

Right. A bank realizing a mistake like this isn't exactly about to annouce it to other clients. Would you continue banking with an establishment that could allow for oversights like this? Not exactly airtight.

 

[SkyFox76]

so why didn't the banks reports and sue on this alledged "fraud" ??

You've had this explained multiple times.

 

[Ambig]

link to that please - I had no idea Trump stole money. Was it in $100 bills or ?? What denominations? Or maybe bitcoins ?

Read the case. It's all in there.

truth is, there was no theft.

The court says you're wrong.

He borrowed money from a bank after the bank looked at everything and wrote a deal they were comfortable with. He repaid the loan.

that's the truth isn't it ?

No. The bank was unable to 'look at things'. 500 or so shell companies.

 

[Ambig]

ok so you don't know - I didn't think you did

Uh... yeah. How would I (or anyone else) know.

but for giggles ... give me one example of a bank having a loan repaid in full and later suing the borrower because of an inflated asset prior to the loan

any examples? any ?

You're not going to suck me into that again. Do your homework.

 

[Ambig]

Right. A bank realizing a mistake like this isn't exactly about to annouce it to other clients. Would you continue banking with an establishment that could allow for oversights like this? Not exactly airtight.

I wonder how the bank stockholders are thinking of this? I'd be kinda mad about it.

 

[EnchantedMuggle]

I wonder how the bank stockholders are thinking of this? I'd be kinda mad about it.

Right?

"How come the banks weren't complaining loudly and publicly about this? Huh? Huh?"

Um, well....

 

[SkyFox76]

ok so you don't know - I didn't think you did

but for giggles ... give me one example of a bank having a loan repaid in full and later suing the borrower because of an inflated asset prior to the loan

any examples? any ?

You're circling the drain at this point.

Trump has been found liable for fraud and the disgorgement is now approximately $468 million from his ill-gotten gains.

Even though the court lowered the amount to $175 million (the $468 will still be there) to make it easier for him to pay, he still hasn't.

The talk about what the banks did or didn't do is irrelevant to the case. They also have no interest in doing any further business with the Trump organization.

 

[Bullseye]

This issue has confused me for a while. For a victimless "crime" why does Trump have to post a humongous bond to appeal it? Smells vaguely unconstitutional. Particularly when the alleged "victim" had no problem with the deal, got repaired and earned a profit.

 

[SkyFox76]

This issue has confused me for a while. For a victimless "crime" why does Trump have to post a humongous bond to appeal it? Smells vaguely unconstitutional. Particularly when the alleged "victim" had no problem with the deal, got repaired and earned a profit.

He doesn't.

 

[stealthycat]

You've had this explained multiple times.

no, the banks were happy with the deals, exactly what the deals were supposed to give back to the banks were fulfilled - no fraud, no lost money, everybody was happy

ya'll want to create something based on guesses - sorry charlie, that's not flying with me

 

[stealthycat]

Read the case. It's all in there.

The court says you're wrong.

No. The bank was unable to 'look at things'. 500 or so shell companies.

the bank made exactly the deal it wanted to and they got exactly what they expected from the loans

the bank was happy - they didn't file a lawsuit because there was absolutely NO REASON to

 

[stealthycat]

Uh... yeah. How would I (or anyone else) know.

You're not going to suck me into that again. Do your homework.

there are no examples - because this is a first time ever type case isn't it ? from an AG who ran her campaign on "get Donald Trump"

ya'll are giggly because you hate Trump - this entire thing is election interference to squash a political opponent and its an attack on Democracy

 

[stealthycat]

You're circling the drain at this point.

Trump has been found liable for fraud and the disgorgement is now approximately $468 million from his ill-gotten gains.

Even though the court lowered the amount to $175 million (the $468 will still be there) to make it easier for him to pay, he still hasn't.

The talk about what the banks did or didn't do is irrelevant to the case. They also have no interest in doing any further business with the Trump organization.

for now - lets see how it plays out

and for this VERY reason I hope Trump wins. You know what would tickle me to death ? Trump wins in Nov ... gets a couple of AG's on his side, a couple of judges, and they get lawsuits on Pelosi, Obama, Schumer, Biden and Harris and AOC and make them all pay $1 billion dollars each. Why not? If a judge rules it, nobody can question it, right ? find something that don't match on loan papers or documents and have a judge declare fraud and level a billion dollar fine each

justice right ?

 

[SkyFox76]

no, the banks were happy with the deals, exactly what the deals were supposed to give back to the banks were fulfilled - no fraud, no lost money, everybody was happy

ya'll want to create something based on guesses - sorry charlie, that's not flying with me

Yes, so happy they ended doing business with Trump.

 

[SkyFox76]

for now - lets see how it plays out

and for this VERY reason I hope Trump wins. You know what would tickle me to death ? Trump wins in Nov ... gets a couple of AG's on his side, a couple of judges, and they get lawsuits on Pelosi, Obama, Schumer, Biden and Harris and AOC and make them all pay $1 billion dollars each. Why not? If a judge rules it, nobody can question it, right ? find something that don't match on loan papers or documents and have a judge declare fraud and level a billion dollar fine each

justice right ?

Enjoy it while you can I suppose.

 

[trixare4kids]

You've had this explained multiple times.

What makes you so sure you explained it correctly to that poster?