So, Trump owes $450M
- Thread starter Soaring Eagle 74
- Start date
Yeah , bifftards better start writing some checks. Then again, maybe they oughta just smarten up.
Get ready for mass business exodus from NY thanks to becoming a legalized banana republic...
Just amazing that Democrats who applaud this out of hate can't see what it will do to others not named Trump.
Who will get checks besides his Lawyers? (they aren't part of his "damages" btw). Who exactly was defrauded? Why the Hell can't you answer that?
@Soaring Eagle 74 ...just clueless
I think that's rather obvious at this point @Soaring Eagle 74 . What a complete joke you are!
And join you bots voting for this cretin?
I told French President Helmut Kohl that I was recently over in Mexico near the border with Gaza and I couldn't believe how Israel was treating the Germans living there!
No thanks!
You obviously don’t realize that if he chooses to appeal, he has to put the judgement plus interest in a court directed escrow account. If he can find a company stupid enough to put up a $550M bond for him, he’ll still have to put up collateral.
Don’t cry Sister Christian.Knuckle dagger Turkey nuts
Sister Christian now the time has come
to realize, that you are the only one
to say,
Don won’t pay
So if you're financially astute enough to understand how he has to account for the judgement while his case makes it's way through the appeals process, why can't you tell us who was "defrauded" and who does he owe this payment to?
@Soaring Eagle 74 ...getting defensive
Maybe because you can't even explain it to yourself?
@Soaring Eagle 74 ...seriously Bro...you're a walking sandwich board for the illogical Left! How the Hell can you talk about what Trump has to do to escrow his judgment until his appeals process is completed, but you have no idea who he's holding the money for? OK, so let's say his appeal fails? Who does he then owe the money to that's been placed in "escrow"?
It's not a hard question to answer, and the fact you keep avoiding an answer tells me more about you than this so called "fraud" Trump is allegedly guilty of.
Good Lord man, you are one piece of uncategorized stupidity.
@Soaring Eagle 74 ...stuck on "dumb"
It's not a hard question to answer, and the fact you keep avoiding an answer tells me more about you than this so called "fraud" Trump is allegedly guilty of.
Good Lord man, you are one piece of uncategorized stupidity.
@Soaring Eagle 74 ...stuck on "dumb"
Who does he have to pay? Is it a fine, monetary damages to one or a few of his lenders, folks who invested in his company...who? Can someone please answer this for me?
Remember, this is Soaring Retard you’re attempting to rationalize with.Who will get checks besides his Lawyers? (they aren't part of his "damages" btw). Who exactly was defrauded? Why the Hell can't you answer that?
@Soaring Eagle 74 ...just clueless
I think that's rather obvious at this point @Soaring Eagle 74 . What a complete joke you are!
The 92-page ruling answers your questions. Please do not ask me to spoon-feed them to you. I read the opinion of the court all the way through, but i don't speak in memes.
NY fraud ruling.
Will it stand up on appeal? Who knows?
I bet there are alot of employees that hope it doesn't and I'm not just talking about Trump's employees. This is getting out of control and I understand what comes next. Some sane Democrats if there are any left need to put a stop to it. That is if they can actually control the monster they have created.
Thanks for posting. I read the first 20 pages, and will finish it tonight when I have more time. Hopefully it will specify who the damages are payable to? I didn't read anything in the first 20 pages depicting any fraud, perhaps some honest disputes about how certain assets are counted or offered as collateral on loans, but nothing I read said anyone was "defrauded", quite the contrary. It specifically mentions "all payments were made in a timely manner".
As I tried to lay out in my little example earlier ITT of how we at my dealership evaluate trades, Trump's bankers had full awareness of his stated assets before his loans were funded. They weren't alleging any deception in what he was offering as proof of his holdings, it appears the only person who questions his accounting practices is this N.Y. AG who is not a fiduciary expert nor a loan underwriter!
I'll finish reading it tonight, and weigh in. I do appreciate you posting it because none of these bots appear lucid enough to even spell out who was defrauded in these transactions let alone conversant enough to explain who's getting paid damages?
Why even try to make sense of it? They are willing to destroy as many lives as possible to keep power. That's the story.
If we had news reporters worth their overpaid mouths, they'd be pouring over this ruling as @The Dunedein did, and as I'm doing so they can better understand just what Trump did here that represented "fraud"? However we don't have reporters, we have paid propagandists who do the bidding of the ruling class to do exactly as you described...destroy as many lives as needed to keep themselves and their handlers in power.
He didn't do anything except run for President as a moderate and you can find plenty of real lawyers that will tell you that. When he gets elected again and appoints a real Attorney General this time. I don't want to hear any crying from these morons.
Last edited:
So folks, after the basketball game I took some time to finish reading the entire 92 page "complaint" and judgment against Trump on his alleged fraud. Being perfectly honest with you all it's a bunch of BS. It's a long detailed rehash of something called GAAP (generally accepted accounting practices) and it includes testimony from both sides over how Trump's assets were compiled, and how they were used on various loans he had structured.
Nowhere within those 92 pages of absolute gobbledygook does it specify where Trump intentionally broke the Law or failed to comply with it. There are honest disagreements over how his assets were documented, what information was used to present them to his various lenders, even how accurate the information was...but it was all done legally without intent to break any compliance Laws.
On top of that, this trial was done without benefit of a Jury...which means any interpretations of honest disagreements over information that was presented were left in the hands of this Judge (Engoron) who obviously has a built in animus towards Trump. The most telling thing to me as I read through the pages and pages of "he said, she said" testimony from various accountants, auditors, and financial experts is not one of the various banks underwriting loans to Trump ever complained of being "defrauded". That complaint came solely from the "plaintiff" in this case the antagonistic NY AG (Letitia James) who filed this case against Trump.
Honestly if anything can be labeled "fraudulent" in this case, it's the fact it was even filed! The most telling thing to me and what I was reading for is who did Trump defraud? Who lost out? Who was owed this money he's been ordered to pay? The "plaintiff" in this case, or the essential complaint from the corrupt AG is that Trump should have been paying much more in interest payments on the various loans he was granted than what he actually paid...therefore he owes the "plaintiff" the difference! How convenient.
Unreal.
I won't bore you all with the details of the various interviews contained within the document that @The Dunedein graciously posted, but I found this particular exchange between Trump and one of the prosecuting attorneys interesting...
(from page pp 34-35 of the Court's findings)
Donald Trump insisted that the values within the SFCs were not only not fraudulently inflated, as this Court has already found, but that, if anything, they were deflated, as the following exchange with OAG demonstrates:
Q. In light of your expertise in real estate, do you recall ever thinking that the values were off in your Statements of Financial Condition?
A. Yeah, on occasion.
Q. What were some of those occasions?
A. Both high and low; both high and low.
Q. Which occasions do you recall?
A. I thought that Mar-a-Lago was very underestimated, but I didn’t do anything about it. I just left it be. It didn’t matter, I didn’t care, because the numbers you are talking about here is, you know, they are very big numbers, very, very big. Far bigger – the values are far bigger than what is on the financial statement. I thought Mar-a-Lago was underestimated. I thought 40 Wall Street was very underestimated because that building has tremendous value. I thought that there were numerous other things. I thought Doral was very underestimated. I thought it was considerably more valuable. Not necessarily [its] golf courses, but it is right in the middle of Miami, right next to the airport. I would say you could build thousands of units and hotels on the site. So you don’t look at it as a golf course. It is a great golf course, very successful, four of them, four courses. One was sold. It was five. One was sold that was a little disconnected, and sold it. But I thought Doral was very underestimated.…
...it goes on
Q. If anything, do you think the statement undervalued your assets; is that correct?
A. Yes, by a lot. The financial statements.
That's the heart of the dispute right there folks! Trump is accused of undervaluing his real estate assets while this AG is trying to suggest he should have placed them at higher values in order to pay more in interest on the loans he got using them as collateral! It's as outrageous as it is preposterous!
I kept reading to see what Laws were broken and it simply comes down to how this prosecutor and Judge view the reporting requirements in New York State when listing assets to obtain loans. They set themselves up as Judge and Jury over what Trump should have declared his holdings were worth, and brought in their handpicked witnesses arguing the various formulas Trump's organization should have used. Incredible but true.
The most amazing thing to me in this entire scam is none of the banks making Trump loans felt they were deceived or defrauded. Not one! None of the loans went into default, not one payment was ever missed, and the banks ultimately were the ones who accepted the assets presented as collateral! It doesn't matter what that Judge or AG think Trump should have declared as the true value of his properties, the banks were satisfied their loans had proper protection against default, and none of their loans ever defaulted, not one!
So it's essentially a case where this Judge and this AG think they have proven Trump conducted fraudulent business practices because he wasn't honest reporting the true value of his assets, and they're saying because of the gains he received from the loans at ostensibly lower interest payments than he should have been paying at higher rates, he should pay the court plaintiff (the AG) the differences! They are spelled out in the summary judgement, which I won't post here but you can read it for yourself starting on page 91.
I'd encourage anyone interested to read this document. It's a peek into how the Law can easily be twisted into anyway a clever prosecutor wants it to be applied. I'll have more on this later, particularly some of the absolute comical testimony from some of these so called "experts" the plaintiffs brought in to try and prove Trump was undervaluing his properties by using formulas they of course would never have used!
Unreal.
Then of course the experts Trump's defense team brought in to rebut the prosecution's so called "experts" were all treated with absolute disdain by this supposedly objective and unbiased Judge? What a joke. I predict Trump easily wins this case on appeal because primarily as I said no Laws were violated (ie there was no fraud used to obtain the loans) and no one was "defrauded". It's a dispute over how to value real estate. All of his loans were re-paid at the agreed interest rates and if he got better rates than some others would have...well good for him! To claim that was in and of itself "fraudulent" or "illegal" that he should have paid more, and therefore owes hundreds of millions due to "ill gotten gains" is a miscarriage of Justice and an absolute scam.
More on this later. A lot more.
Nowhere within those 92 pages of absolute gobbledygook does it specify where Trump intentionally broke the Law or failed to comply with it. There are honest disagreements over how his assets were documented, what information was used to present them to his various lenders, even how accurate the information was...but it was all done legally without intent to break any compliance Laws.
On top of that, this trial was done without benefit of a Jury...which means any interpretations of honest disagreements over information that was presented were left in the hands of this Judge (Engoron) who obviously has a built in animus towards Trump. The most telling thing to me as I read through the pages and pages of "he said, she said" testimony from various accountants, auditors, and financial experts is not one of the various banks underwriting loans to Trump ever complained of being "defrauded". That complaint came solely from the "plaintiff" in this case the antagonistic NY AG (Letitia James) who filed this case against Trump.
Honestly if anything can be labeled "fraudulent" in this case, it's the fact it was even filed! The most telling thing to me and what I was reading for is who did Trump defraud? Who lost out? Who was owed this money he's been ordered to pay? The "plaintiff" in this case, or the essential complaint from the corrupt AG is that Trump should have been paying much more in interest payments on the various loans he was granted than what he actually paid...therefore he owes the "plaintiff" the difference! How convenient.
Unreal.
I won't bore you all with the details of the various interviews contained within the document that @The Dunedein graciously posted, but I found this particular exchange between Trump and one of the prosecuting attorneys interesting...
(from page pp 34-35 of the Court's findings)
Donald Trump insisted that the values within the SFCs were not only not fraudulently inflated, as this Court has already found, but that, if anything, they were deflated, as the following exchange with OAG demonstrates:
Q. In light of your expertise in real estate, do you recall ever thinking that the values were off in your Statements of Financial Condition?
A. Yeah, on occasion.
Q. What were some of those occasions?
A. Both high and low; both high and low.
Q. Which occasions do you recall?
A. I thought that Mar-a-Lago was very underestimated, but I didn’t do anything about it. I just left it be. It didn’t matter, I didn’t care, because the numbers you are talking about here is, you know, they are very big numbers, very, very big. Far bigger – the values are far bigger than what is on the financial statement. I thought Mar-a-Lago was underestimated. I thought 40 Wall Street was very underestimated because that building has tremendous value. I thought that there were numerous other things. I thought Doral was very underestimated. I thought it was considerably more valuable. Not necessarily [its] golf courses, but it is right in the middle of Miami, right next to the airport. I would say you could build thousands of units and hotels on the site. So you don’t look at it as a golf course. It is a great golf course, very successful, four of them, four courses. One was sold. It was five. One was sold that was a little disconnected, and sold it. But I thought Doral was very underestimated.…
...it goes on
Q. If anything, do you think the statement undervalued your assets; is that correct?
A. Yes, by a lot. The financial statements.
That's the heart of the dispute right there folks! Trump is accused of undervaluing his real estate assets while this AG is trying to suggest he should have placed them at higher values in order to pay more in interest on the loans he got using them as collateral! It's as outrageous as it is preposterous!
I kept reading to see what Laws were broken and it simply comes down to how this prosecutor and Judge view the reporting requirements in New York State when listing assets to obtain loans. They set themselves up as Judge and Jury over what Trump should have declared his holdings were worth, and brought in their handpicked witnesses arguing the various formulas Trump's organization should have used. Incredible but true.
The most amazing thing to me in this entire scam is none of the banks making Trump loans felt they were deceived or defrauded. Not one! None of the loans went into default, not one payment was ever missed, and the banks ultimately were the ones who accepted the assets presented as collateral! It doesn't matter what that Judge or AG think Trump should have declared as the true value of his properties, the banks were satisfied their loans had proper protection against default, and none of their loans ever defaulted, not one!
So it's essentially a case where this Judge and this AG think they have proven Trump conducted fraudulent business practices because he wasn't honest reporting the true value of his assets, and they're saying because of the gains he received from the loans at ostensibly lower interest payments than he should have been paying at higher rates, he should pay the court plaintiff (the AG) the differences! They are spelled out in the summary judgement, which I won't post here but you can read it for yourself starting on page 91.
I'd encourage anyone interested to read this document. It's a peek into how the Law can easily be twisted into anyway a clever prosecutor wants it to be applied. I'll have more on this later, particularly some of the absolute comical testimony from some of these so called "experts" the plaintiffs brought in to try and prove Trump was undervaluing his properties by using formulas they of course would never have used!
Unreal.
Then of course the experts Trump's defense team brought in to rebut the prosecution's so called "experts" were all treated with absolute disdain by this supposedly objective and unbiased Judge? What a joke. I predict Trump easily wins this case on appeal because primarily as I said no Laws were violated (ie there was no fraud used to obtain the loans) and no one was "defrauded". It's a dispute over how to value real estate. All of his loans were re-paid at the agreed interest rates and if he got better rates than some others would have...well good for him! To claim that was in and of itself "fraudulent" or "illegal" that he should have paid more, and therefore owes hundreds of millions due to "ill gotten gains" is a miscarriage of Justice and an absolute scam.
More on this later. A lot more.
Last edited:
@The Dunedein this question is specifically for you since you're a Lawyer and you read the judgement against Trump. Do you believe Trump broke the Law either intentionally or inadvertently reporting his assets to obtain the various loans he was granted? In other words, did the Prosecution prove its claim of fraud? If so, how? If not, why did the Judge rule as he did?
My concern is if the banks were OK with the interest rates he was being charged, and were all paid in full, where's the fraud? So he got lower rates, is that illegal?
My concern is if the banks were OK with the interest rates he was being charged, and were all paid in full, where's the fraud? So he got lower rates, is that illegal?
Last edited:
Yes. Most glaring example that comes to my addled brain at midnight is the valuation of Mar-a-Lago. In order to lower his property taxes, Trump signed a Deed that designated it as a social club, in perpetuity (forever), rather than a residence. Then, in various loan papers he valued it as if it were a residence (a higher value than a social club). Having been the one who signed the Deed designating it as a social club to get the benefit of lower property taxes, he certainly knew it could not be legally valued as a residence (a much higher value, thus the difference in taxes). Can't have it both ways.@The Dunedein this question is specifically for you since you're a Lawyer and you read the judgement against Trump. Do you believe Trump broke the Law either intentionally or inadvertently reporting his assets to obtain the various loans he was granted? In other words, did the Prosecution prove its claim of fraud? If so, how? If not, why did the Judge rule as he did?
My concern is if the banks were OK with the interest rates he was being charged, and were all paid in full, where's the fraud? So he got lower rates, is that illegal?
To one of your other issues, Trump's lawyers never requested a jury trial. Perhaps they made a tactical decision in that regard.
The monetary fine seems to be directed at disgorgement of illegal benefits, not reimbursement or compensation. I reckon the money will go to the State of New York (i.e., the public fund, which benefits the taxpayers), although i don't claim to know New York law.
Thanks for that info .
How many others in trumps business do you think is playing the tax game in various ways? How many of us on rivals web site is playing tax games at different times?
Normal brain talking....anything else is socialists brain trying to use government to get rid of political opponents.....
OK but the banks are not the ones claiming a loss. (disgorgement). I guess the issue in my mind is since when is it illegal to negotiate better loan rates for yourself?
Even if he (Trump) was using valuations different than existing market appraisals, wouldn't the bank's loan underwriters be the final decision makers on if the loans were adequately collateralized? Regarding his classifications of Mar-a-Lago that value too is up to his local tax assessment board. Doesn't matter what he calls it, the taxes are still assessed based on the actual value of the property independent of his nomenclature are they not?
I think this case stands a good chance to be overturned on appeal primarily because none of the Lenders is claiming loss or fraud or seeks any compensatory damages. In order for this case to be upheld, prosecutors in my mind have to clearly demonstrate who was harmed by Trump paying lower interest rates than what the plaintiff (OAG) thinks he should have been paying. After reading through their case I don't believe they made a convincing argument. Certainly none of Trump's lenders believe they lost anything making those loans, and most were eager to make more for him!
And he’ll have to have an independent monitor overseeing biff’s business activity. That will be fun.
You're not going to bankrupt him. He has assets he can easily sell of to satisfy that obligation if it's not overturned on appeal. Additionally he can simply open new business ventures or generate additional revenue such as his recent offering for stylish footwear. You also are not going to beat him with better policies or even a better candidate because voters already have rejected his inept and corrupt installed replacement primarily because of his poor performance and lousy policies. Plus Democrats can't win without cheating and we're making sure it's damn harder for you scofflaws to cheat in '24 like you got away with in '20.
So all you have left is to get ready for the 47th President of the United States...Donald John Trump
Makes 'ya miserable just considering it don't it @bamaEER ?
@bamaEER ....resigned to defeat
Latest
-
01
WV Sports
Andrew Warwick came running when WVU opportunity arrived
-
02
Rivals
Eye-Catchers: Miami, Georgia, Clemson, West Virginia commits and more flash in loaded Carol City-Lee County thriller
-
03
WV Sports
Chams Diagne using rare length, physicality at WVU
-
04
WV Sports
Cam Cook’s experience creating opportunities in WVU backfield
-
05
WV Sports
Inside the numbers on expected WVU starting QB Michael Hawkins