The (many) indictments of Donald Trump

#20,926
#20,926
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and StarRaider
#20,928
#20,928
 
#20,933
#20,933
lawgator1 said:
Its not the amount that matters. Its that he was found guilty of having committed fraud and to date that conclusion is intact. The judges im fact found thay there was more than enough evidence to substantiate the charge.

Its amazing how much MAGA folks will distort the actual result here, and seize on the least important fact, so as to ignore the fundamental truth that Trump is a con man.
Click to expand...
But let’s get down to brass tacks here shall we? Everyone came out ahead in the deal. The lenders had absolutely no complaints. Who exactly was calling for this to be investigated much less prosecuted?
(Hint: NO ONE except for democrat politicians trying to find ANYTHING to derail Trump)
I was half expecting someone to indict the man for having overdue library books in middle school or removing the tag from a mattress.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider, Orangeslice13 and LibertyVol
#20,935
#20,935
OrangeTsar said:
But let’s get down to brass tacks here shall we? Everyone came out ahead in the deal. The lenders had absolutely no complaints. Who exactly was calling for this to be investigated much less prosecuted?
(Hint: NO ONE except for democrat politicians trying to find ANYTHING to derail Trump)
I was half expecting someone to indict the man for having overdue library books in middle school or removing the tag from a mattress.
Click to expand...
Do you want to encourage fraudulent efforts to receive loans? Just bc it worked out in this instance doesnt mean it always will. I think we should discourage fraud
 
#20,938
#20,938
www.foxnews.com

Judge who fined Trump $500M gets the books thrown at him

Judge Arthur Engoron's $500 million fine against Donald Trump was rejected by an appellate court, with no portion of the judgment preserved.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com

"For some of us who covered that trial, the most vivid image of Engoron came at the start. He indicated that he did not want cameras in the courtroom, but when the networks showed up, Engoron took off his glasses and seemed to pose for the cameras.

It was a "Sunset Boulevard" moment. We only need Gloria Swanson looking into the camera to speak to "those wonderful people out there in the dark!" and announcing "all right, [Ms. James], I'm ready for my close-up."

The close-up was not a good idea, and, on appeal, it was perfectly disastrous. The court found little legal or factual basis for his fine. The purported witnesses not only did not lose a dime, but they testified that they made money on the loans and wanted new loans with the Trump administration. That did not move Engoron. From the start, he was speaking to those "wonderful people out there."

Judge David Friedman gave Engoron a close-up that would have made Swanson wince. He detailed how the underlying law "has never been used in the way it is being used in this case – namely, to attack successful, private, commercial transactions, negotiated at arm’s length between highly sophisticated parties fully capable of monitoring and defending their own interests."
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85, LibertyVol and UT_Dutchman
#20,939
#20,939
BigOrangeMojo said:
If I give a bank a fake W2 to get a loan, is it a crime even if I pay it back in full with interest?
Click to expand...
Help me out because you tend to know these things, and till now I have not cared about this and simply don’t know.
Did Trump argue that he didn’t overvalue assets? Or did he ignore that change and end run to “nobody got hurt” because so far all I’ve seen from his side was “it’s complicated “

I guess what I’m asking is, was fraud proven or just assumed?
 
#20,942
#20,942
Orangeslice13 said:
Help me out because you tend to know these things, and till now I have not cared about this and simply don’t know.
Did Trump argue that he didn’t overvalue assets? Or did he ignore that change and end run to “nobody got hurt” because so far all I’ve seen from his side was “it’s complicated “

I guess what I’m asking is, was fraud proven or just assumed?
Click to expand...

The fraud was proven. The issue for the state was whether penalties could be handed out for ill gotten gains. Ultimately, any ill gotten gains would have likely been small and nowhere near the 500M assessed against him.

1. He overvalued certain assets, such as 40 Wall St. Every developer does this. Where this gets into the legal gray area is the bank application asked if he had any recent appraisals, which he lied to. He had them done but chose to ignore them. He would take the cap rates from those appraisals, apply them to a made up number for his property, and gave that number to the bank as the value. Trump even admitted on the stand that he was wrong/lied when valuing his Trump Tower penthouse (He said it was 3x larger than it actually was on bank forms) The issue for the state is even of he is guilty here, the lenders knew the underlying assets so penalties would be very small.

2. The accounting standards require certain assets with covenant restrictions, like MAL, to be valued differently. On applications, Trump said the stmts provided were done by this standard. They werent. Same issue remains as #1, even if guilty, the lender knew what the underlying assets were so penalties would be small.

Right now, IMO, these first two are nothing burgers. Yes, unethical and definitely bordering on illegal.

Here is where Trump gets into trouble

3. Lender asked Trump for profit and loss for 40 Wall Street for prior years. Unlike the value of actual building, the lender wouldnt know exactly what its profit/loss is without client providing numbers. Trump took actual profit/loss activity, made up revenue that didnt happen, removed expenses that did happen, and gave that to the bank. Then gave future projections on those fake numbers.

4. Trump lied about liquid assets on applications. For cash on hand, he included the entire cash holdings of a partnership he was invested in although he was only a limited partner and the fact that cash was completely restrictred.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#20,943
#20,943
Sandman 423 said:
I have no issue with them being found guilty. I have an issue with how they got to the point of charging the crime.
Click to expand...

This is where I am struggling. (Fairness vs Rule of law)

This was clearly politcally motivated and nowhere else is this fact pattern being tried in court. The other side of the coin is he is breaking the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol and Sandman 423
#20,944
#20,944
McDad said:
Yes.

If my bank wants a value on an asset for collateral, which value crosses the threshold to fraud?
Click to expand...

When you knowingly and purposefully provide false info and you put it on bank app...

Me thinking my house is worth 600K when market says its worth 500K isnt fraud.

Me saying I have 600K of cash when I only have 500K is fraud
 
  • Like
Reactions: dalton_vol
#20,945
#20,945
BigOrangeMojo said:
When you knowingly and purposefully provide false info and you put it on bank app...

Me thinking my house is worth 600K when market says its worth 500K isnt fraud.

Me saying I have 600K of cash when I only have 500K is fraud
Click to expand...
I thought the essence of the case was the "fraudulent" value of his real estate (or one piece of real estate, Mar A Largo).

eta... no need to reply. read your post explaining things.
 
#20,946
#20,946
McDad said:
I thought the essence of the case was the "fraudulent" value of his real estate (or one piece of real estate, Mar A Largo).
Click to expand...

The essence was he filed fraudulent applications with the bank to get better lending terms. The supposed "overvaluation" of real estate was just one part of it....
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top