Trump fraud case just fell apart

a reply to: Mahogany

Lol, I'm sorry pal, I really thought you understood this. Maybe next time just say that rather than pretend to know.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Mahogany

Yeah, okay...buddy.

Enjoy your smug, and side of rainbows. This ain't over.

Of course it's not over. This 35 page ruling was only to determine fraud. The trial continues for damages, insurance fraud and more.

You think it's smug that I explain law to people, or that I would like to see Donald Trump behind bars? Because neither of those things is actually smugness.

Smug would be years and years of people saying, "Oh I'm so tired of winning! All Trump does is win!"

Not saying you did that, but that's smugness -- and it didn't age very well.

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Mahogany

Yeah, okay...buddy.

Enjoy your smug, and side of rainbows. This ain't over.

Of course it's not over. This 35 page ruling was only to determine fraud. The trial continues for damages, insurance fraud and more.

You think it's smug that I explain law to people, or that I would like to see Donald Trump behind bars? Because neither of those things is actually smugness.

Smug would be years and years of people saying, "Oh I'm so tired of winning! All Trump does is win!"

Not saying you did that, but that's smugness -- and it didn't age very well.

Yeah here we are stuck with years of losing with Biden.

Hurt feelz aside, you did better under Trump and you know it.

a reply to: Mahogany

Since you're merely here to explain to us plebs what the "law" is....


Could you go ahead and explain a summary judgement in relation to fraud. Also bringing fourth the elements of the statute of fraud being applied?


Appreciate it....

Anyone who has gotten a mortgage loan is aware that the bank has appraisers and safety measures in effect to guard their interests. People overstate the value of their assets all the time because they believe what they own is worth more than it actually is. Banks know this, especially big banks, they go over everything presented and do adjustments.

Trump did no more wrong than two thirds of the adults in America. The bank is responsible for verifying the information, most people believe they are worth more than they are. Businesses fail all the time, banks know that counting on their value can be risky, so they adjust the value to make sure they can secure their loan.

The people who leveled these charges should have more common sense and should have checked out everything before bringing charges, they screwed up badly because they wanted to believe that Trump was like Biden.

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Mahogany

Yeah, okay...buddy.

Enjoy your smug, and side of rainbows. This ain't over.

Of course it's not over. This 35 page ruling was only to determine fraud. The trial continues for damages, insurance fraud and more.

You think it's smug that I explain law to people, or that I would like to see Donald Trump behind bars? Because neither of those things is actually smugness.

Smug would be years and years of people saying, "Oh I'm so tired of winning! All Trump does is win!"

Not saying you did that, but that's smugness -- and it didn't age very well.

the smugness was when you claimed we weren't smart enough to understand this, and you tried to use the stupidest analogy ever, only to show that you didn't understand it at all. It's a common thing with smug arrogance.

Rather than harp on you for not understanding any of this, perhaps you could show us another case like this. When was the last time this law was used against a business man borrowing money from banks?

originally posted by: Mahogany
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Not my logic, buddy.

That is how the law works. Based on this law, he was found to have committed fraud.

He lied on financial documents, conspired with others in his company to do so, gotten loans he shouldn't have qualified for, swindled the banks for more favorable rates, essentially taking money from them, put others at risk and then got caught for it.

Don't believe me? Matters not.

This is incorrect.

First, there are NO VICTIMS. Even the AG's case filing and judge have stated this is the case. The banks loans were paid back and no bank has accused Trump of fraud. The only fraud claim is coming from the AG.

The AG's claim of fraud is that the Statement of Financial Condition that Trump provided to banks is much higher than what other sources have valued his assets, namely the property tax assessor. For example, Trump says Mar-a-Largo is worth like $750 million but the Palm Beach county tax assessor said it was worth $18 million. The AG is saying because Trump stated Mar-a-largo is worth more to banks than the property tax assessor, he has committed fraud.

Anyone with two functioning brain cells knows that Mar-a-largo is worth way more than $18 million. There is an EMPTY beachfront lot in Palm Beach currently listed for sale at $200 million. Here is the listing so you can see for your self. There is also another asking $150 million.

www.realtor.com...

www.realtor.com...

Keep in mind, Mar-a-Largo sits on TWENTY ACRES. Just the dirt alone is worth close $1 billion conservatively, never mind a fully developed historic property.

So why the discrepancy in valuation?

Mar-a-Largo is deeded as a CLUB, not a residence. It functions as a country club. As such, the property valuation method the local tax assessor uses is different than if it were considered a private residence.

Trump and anyone with rudimentary understanding of real estate understands the real market value of the property which is different from the tax assessed value. This discrepancy is a county tax assessor issue, not Trumps.

Take Trump out of the picture entirely. Assume he doesn't exist. Let's say you bought a house on some land for $500,000. You discover that the property is sitting on oil deposits worth $20 million. However, the local zoning board says the property is residential, therefore you can't personally drill for the oil. The property tax assessor values the home at $500,000.

A bank asks you how much your home is worth? What are you going to say? $500,000 or $20 million? If you were to sell the home, how much would you ask? $500,000 or $20 million? Keep in mind, everyone knows there are $20 million in oil deposits.

Be honest...

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Mahogany

Yeah, okay...buddy.

Enjoy your smug, and side of rainbows. This ain't over.

And that's the part you're missing. Just because some judge ruled on something which has mammoth implications (which you just happen to agree with, for a variety of reasons, I'm sure) doesn't mean you can just camp out on it and continually regurgitate the same line. Furthermore, the implications of this ruling are so wide ranging that no higher court will allow this precedent to stand simply because of the avalanche of "Me TOO!!" suits which will certainly follow from about every direction imaginable. But you kinda' missed that point, didn't you. Nope, they got your evil Trump...and that's all that matters to you. The rest of the World could burn down and you'd be happy.

Let's examine your "It's the law" statement. Yes, there are fraud laws, but what you're missing here is a judge has wrongly applied this law and made an erroneous legal determination which will almost certainly be overturned based on lack of merit.

So, enjoy it while you can.

ETA -And 'Avalanche' doesn't even begin to describe it...more like TIDAL WAVE is more like it!!

Using their logic, Roe v Wade should have stayed, since Judges have final say.

a reply to: Edumakated

But it's not just MAL that's the issue. For multiple years they knowingly used non-existent assets to inflate the value of the Bedminster property. They valued Trump's triplex off of one triple the size. Considering that built the thing you would think they'd be the ones to know that it was 10,000 sq. ft. and not 30,000 sq. ft.

And those are just the examples that have come out in the first two weeks. The trial is expected to last months and have over 100 witnesses. There's certainly more revelations like this to come that will illustrate a long history of the Trump Organization intentionally lying on their Statements of Financial Condition in an attempt to secure better loan conditions.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Edumakated

But it's not just MAL that's the issue. For multiple years they knowingly used non-existent assets to inflate the value of the Bedminster property. They valued Trump's triplex off of one triple the size. Considering that built the thing you would think they'd be the ones to know that it was 10,000 sq. ft. and not 30,000 sq. ft.

And those are just the examples that have come out in the first two weeks. The trial is expected to last months and have over 100 witnesses. There's certainly more revelations like this to come that will illustrate a long history of the Trump Organization intentionally lying on their Statements of Financial Condition in an attempt to secure better loan conditions.

Except for the fact that banks don't use SFCs to make loans. Banks conduct their own due diligence of the value of assets being used to secure a loan. So regardless of what Trump may have claimed / boasted, any bank is going to do their own appraisal and analyses of financial condition. People's opinion of the value of their assets often wildly differs from what a bank considers. I work in banking and deal with this everyday.

If a residential property is being used to secure a mortgage or loan, the bank will hire an appraiser to assess value. If it is a commercial or investment property, the bank will get financial statements, etc and conduct their own due diligence on the business viability.

This is why there are no victims and no banks have claimed they have been defrauded.

My understanding is Trump owns three floors of Trump Tower... each floor being 10,000 sqft, but he only lives on one floor.

a reply to: Edumakated

Just because a bank chooses not to take Trump's word at face value doesn't change the fact that he attempted to defraud them.

The word "fraud" or "fraudulent" as used herein shall include any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false
promise or unconscionable contractual provisions.

That is how the law in question defines fraud. Did the Trump Organization knowingly provide banks with false information for years in an attempt to gain better terms?

In regards to the triplex, it is 10,000 sq ft total for all three floors. This is supported by building records and even Trump's own words in 1994. Weisselberg has admitted that the triplex was overvalued by $200 million.

originally posted by: peter_kandra

originally posted by: Duggz
I hate these political threads, even this forum most times, but what the hell. I'm assuming this is his NY real estate charges.

The crux is that he UNLAWFULLY misrepresented his business value and the equity of his assets, which is in fact illegal per the government. You know, the ones who make laws. Hence why it is the real reason he is in court, as Trump never left a debt to default- which also isn't illegal itself even if he had. If he needed a haircut that's pretty much a smoking gun piece of evidence that he did in fact misrepresent his business. Do not mistake accounting and equity procedures in private business for the rule of law, it is not. Just because nobody was left holding the short stick doesn't mean everything was legal.

It honestly amazes me how many of the posters here seem so worried about something they literally cannot bother to spend five minutes learning about, so when they get snippets thrown in their face they can somehow think it's a good thing. Must be nice.

Unlawfully how? If my town estimates my house as being worth $600k for taxes, the bank says it's worth $500k for obtaining a mortgage and I think it's only worth $450k based on recent comps, who's right? Would it be unlawful if I put the valuation down as $600k on a loan application?

There is no law against anything in this story.

But guys like this think if they yell “unlawful !!” really loud, it just becomes magically illegal.
For Trump Only. Certainly not for the judge who grossly undervalued the property just to be a Dick.

a reply to: stevieray

The judge didn't provide a valuation on anything. He was citing the valuation done by the Palm Beach assessor. The same Palm Beach assessor that in 2020 valued the property at $26 million and Trump argued that was too high.

originally posted by: Biginpc
a reply to: Duggz

If he committed a crime, why is it civil court and not criminal?

Lol, because there’s literally not a crime to be pursued, only the hope of landing 12 jurors who hate Trump, and will be thrilled to take money and stuff from him, with no crime.

Just like Homely old ugly Betty who was supposedly raped just like the Kavanaugh broad. No crime to be found, so find 12 Trump haters and gig him for some money.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: stevieray

The judge didn't provide a valuation on anything. He was citing the valuation done by the Palm Beach assessor. The same Palm Beach assessor that in 2020 valued the property at $26 million and Trump argued that was too high.

Nobody forced the judge to use anybody’s specific value. He was thrilled to find one this inaccurate that was bad for Trump. If he was concerned about it being egregiously wrong, he’d get one done by other means. IF a real assessor did this valuation he should be fired and the equivalent of disbarred. It’s a hatchet job in and of itself.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: stevieray

The judge didn't provide a valuation on anything. He was citing the valuation done by the Palm Beach assessor. The same Palm Beach assessor that in 2020 valued the property at $26 million and Trump argued that was too high.

I doubt you have a real interest in understanding this, as BAMN is the going DERP thing. But if you ask someone at your local tax office about this, they can explain it quite well. People will want to undervalue their property for the TAX man, and maximize the value when it's time to sell. If you complain to the tax man, like Trump did, you might get your value lowered and pay less taxes, but it's up to the tax man, not Trump. Just as the valuation of his properties when it comes to his net worth. He would inflate his assets if he needed to. As his net worth is between 2.5 billion and 4.5 billion, I can't imagine him borrowing billions, but perhaps he did. Until we know numbers of what he borrowed, none of this really matters.

And knowing he is doing what most business people do, I really think this is going to boomerang on the idiot dems when Trump is president again. He can have his DOJ target democrats and rail them up the ass, since that is now totally acceptable based on the way things now operate. Precedence. It won't be any more right when he does it, but I sure won't say anything. It's nomfb.

a reply to: network dude

As I've pointed out before, the MAL valuation is just a small piece of a much larger case. And even then you're not focusing on the relevant part. Trump's valuation of the property itself isn't the fraud. It's the fact that his valuation claims that MAL is a residence when he knows full well that is not the case. It is a beach club that is on the National Register of Historic Places, which severely limits what can be done with the property.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: network dude

As I've pointed out before, the MAL valuation is just a small piece of a much larger case. And even then you're not focusing on the relevant part. Trump's valuation of the property itself isn't the fraud. It's the fact that his valuation claims that MAL is a residence when he knows full well that is not the case. It is a beach club that is on the National Register of Historic Places, which severely limits what can be done with the property.

If you truly understand this, explain it. Don't give smug asshole posts and scamper off, explain it so everyone understands.

Unless you don't really understand it, in which case, saying that would do you well.

a reply to: network dude

What's to explain? MAL has strict restrictions on how the land can be developed due to being on the National Register. It also cannot be used as a residence as it is dubbed as a beach club. But Trump's valuation is based off it being a single family residence. Trump knows it can't be used as a residence but his valuation did not disclose that fact.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: network dude

What's to explain? MAL has strict restrictions on how the land can be developed due to being on the National Register. It also cannot be used as a residence as it is dubbed as a beach club. But Trump's valuation is based off it being a single family residence. Trump knows it can't be used as a residence but his valuation did not disclose that fact.

so this all hinges on MAL? See, that's the part where it looks like you haven't a clue about this. Prove me wrong and explain it.