Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Trump Found Liable For Real Estate Fraud; Business Certificates Dissolved

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
    So, as expected his kkkult is completely unbothered by his flagrant fraud. One can only hope the rest of the country is not so blind.
    There was no flagrant fraud.

    Again, Trump can decide his property is worth whatever he wants, but if he goes to a bank and puts his property up as collateral for a loan, the bank doesn't just take his word for it and will do its own homework to determine for themselves what the property is really worth. As Trump's legal counsel noted (from your source):

    "Without even conducting a trial, the Court substituted its own judgment for that of nationally recognized experts from the NYU Stern School of Business and beyond. More importantly, the Court disregarded the viewpoint of those actually involved in the loan transactions who testified there was nothing misleading, there was no fraud, and the transactions were all highly profitable."
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

      There was no flagrant fraud.

      Again, Trump can decide his property is worth whatever he wants, but if he goes to a bank and puts his property up as collateral for a loan, the bank doesn't just take his word for it and will do its own homework to determine for themselves what the property is really worth. As Trump's legal counsel noted (from your source):

      "Without even conducting a trial, the Court substituted its own judgment for that of nationally recognized experts from the NYU Stern School of Business and beyond. More importantly, the Court disregarded the viewpoint of those actually involved in the loan transactions who testified there was nothing misleading, there was no fraud, and the transactions were all highly profitable."
      Typically a bank will send out their own appraiser to decide what a property is worth. That's what happened when I got a loan to buy my current home. They couldn't care less what I or the seller thinks it is worth. They will only loan money based on their own appraisal. If they don't then it is their own fault if they end up lending more than it is worth.

      Comment


      • #18
        I haven't followed this lawsuit so I don't know the merits. But the part I read about the judge declaring Mar-A-Lago is only worth $18 million is insane. Three moderate condominiums in Palm Beach are worth more than a 126-room estate? I don't think so.

        oceanfront properties.jpg
        Last edited by Ronson; 09-27-2023, 04:13 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
          So, as expected his kkkult is completely unbothered by his flagrant fraud. One can only hope the rest of the country is not so blind.
          Blind to what? Judicial overreach? A individual who literally campaigned on going after Trump?
          P1) If , then I win.

          P2)

          C) I win.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

            Blind to what? Judicial overreach? A individual who literally campaigned on going after Trump?
            Case in point

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post

              Typically a bank will send out their own appraiser to decide what a property is worth. That's what happened when I got a loan to buy my current home. They couldn't care less what I or the seller thinks it is worth. They will only loan money based on their own appraisal. If they don't then it is their own fault if they end up lending more than it is worth.
              Yes, an appraiser, or they will simply look up the property tax records. This idea that Trump was somehow pulling one over on the bank by supposedly overvaluing his properties is absurd.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                Yes, an appraiser, or they will simply look up the property tax records. This idea that Trump was somehow pulling one over on the bank by supposedly overvaluing his properties is absurd.
                Every time I sold one of my homes, I was able to list it for anything I wanted. No crime there. But the appraiser ultimately dictates the asking price, otherwise I would have been sitting around for a long time hoping for someone wealthy enough to buy my home without a bank loan.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  Just more dog-piling at this point. They are trying to overwhelm him with lawsuits and legal matters to keep him from running for POTUS. It won't work. The more you kick Trump and his supporters the more determined they become.
                  It shows quite a difference between the two sides. If Biden had been found guilty in something like this, the party would have dropped him immediately. The Dem voters would never be willing to vote for a criminal candidate.

                  The Republican voters on the other hand seem to love the criminality. They just psychotically reinterpret it as persecution of their cult leader.

                  Well, okay. Tells me a lot.
                  "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                  "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                  "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Ronson View Post

                    Every time I sold one of my homes, I was able to list it for anything I wanted. No crime there. But the appraiser ultimately dictates the asking price, otherwise I would have been sitting around for a long time hoping for someone wealthy enough to buy my home without a bank loan.
                    The judge in the case is well versed in the law, probably even more so than you, MM and Sparko. Trump defenders are. And you can be sure that if your arguments in defense of Trump had any validity to them, then Trumps lawyers would have used them in his defense. You can also be sure that the prosecutor would have taken all and any arguments Trump could have put forth in his defense to account before deciding to prosecute.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                      Case in point
                      At no point have I said Trump was not guilty, though banks quite logically would do their own loan assessments. If the banks did not agree to Trump's valuation, they wouldn't have agreed to the loans. If the banks felt themselves defrauded, why would they stay silent? The would have taken Trump to court long ago.

                      If there's no complaint of fraud, there's no case. Do you deny running on the campaign promise to target Trump creates a target of interest? It's strange to see a libertarian support overreach by the State.
                      Last edited by Diogenes; 09-27-2023, 07:08 PM.
                      P1) If , then I win.

                      P2)

                      C) I win.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                        It shows quite a difference between the two sides. If Biden had been found guilty in something like this, the party would have dropped him immediately. The Dem voters would never be willing to vote for a criminal candidate.

                        Have you surveyed all Democrat voters?
                        Last edited by Diogenes; 09-27-2023, 07:08 PM.
                        P1) If , then I win.

                        P2)

                        C) I win.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by JimL View Post

                          The judge in the case is well versed in the law, probably even more so than you, MM and Sparko. Trump defenders are. And you can be sure that if your arguments in defense of Trump had any validity to them, then Trumps lawyers would have used them in his defense. You can also be sure that the prosecutor would have taken all and any arguments Trump could have put forth in his defense to account before deciding to prosecute.
                          You've apparently never owned a home. A person can sell their home for any price they want. The reason Trump's lawyers lost is because the NYC machine is corrupt and is capable of railroading people.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                            At no point have I said Trump was not guilty, though banks quite logically would do their own loan assessments. If the banks did not agree to Trump's valuation, they wouldn't have agreed to the loans. If the banks felt themselves defrauded, why would they stay silent? The would have taken Trump to court long ago.

                            If there's no complaint of fraud, there's no case. Do you deny running on the campaign promise to target Trump creates a target of interest? It's strange to see a libertarian support overreach by the State.
                            The only way Trump could have defrauded someone is if he lied about the property - not because he overvalued it. Did it have termite damage that he knew about and didn't divulge? Flood damage? Seepage? Cracked foundation? If it had problems AND he knew about them AND he didn't divulge them, then it would be fraud. But just because he values his property 10X greater than what an appraiser sets its value as, that's not criminal. Stupid maybe, because banks wouldn't loan money toward the purchase.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                              At no point have I said Trump was not guilty, though banks quite logically would do their own loan assessments. If the banks did not agree to Trump's valuation, they wouldn't have agreed to the loans. If the banks felt themselves defrauded, why would they stay silent? The would have taken Trump to court long ago.

                              If there's no complaint of fraud, there's no case. Do you deny running on the campaign promise to target Trump creates a target of interest? It's strange to see a libertarian support overreach by the State.
                              Not to mention that the bank got its money back since Trump paid the loan back on time. I ask those with TDS Who lost anything and what was the fraud? *From what I see no one lost anything Since Trump paid off the loan and the bank was satisfied with the value Trump estimated because they did not do their own evaluation of the property as Trump through his lawyers suggested so there was no fraud, only judicial overreach by a corrupt judge who wants to interfere with the election.




                              *For those of you who seem to not know the difference between someone stating their opinion and bringing up facts This is My Opinion.
                              Last edited by RumTumTugger; 09-27-2023, 08:19 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by RumTumTugger View Post

                                Not to mention that the bank got its money back since Trump paid the loan back on time. I ask those with TDS Who lost anything and what was the fraud? From what I see no one lost anything and the bank was satisfied with the value Trump estimated because they did not do their own evaluation of the property as Trump through his lawyers suggested so there was no fraud, only judicial over reach.
                                This is addressed in the ruling:

                                Source: PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BY LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK vs. TRUMP, DONALD J. ET AL Motion Nos. 026, 027, 028

                                Defendants assert that overvaluations of two hundred million dollars are immaterial, as the "NY AG has produced no evidence to suggest. . . that Ladder Capital would have been uncomfortable allowing President Trump to guarantee the 40 Wall Street Loan if his net worth was only $1.9 billion, as the NY AG contends." NYSCEF Doc. No. 835 at 48. They further emphasize that "Ladder Capital has received in excess of $40 million in interest and 40 Wall Street LLC has never defaulted under the Loan."20 Id.

                                Defendants' argument misses the mark. As has been explained to defendants many times, in many legal proceedings, and in painstaking detail, "where, as here, there is a claim based on fraudulent activity [under Executive Law 63(1 2)], disgorgement may be available as an equitable remedy, notwithstanding the absence of loss to individuals or independent claims for restitution." Ernst & Young at 569 (emphasis added). Accordingly, it is not significant that the banks made money ( or did not lose money )21 , or that they would have done business with the Trump Organization notwithstanding. The law is clear that the only requirements for liability to attach under a standalone Executive Law 63( 12) cause of action are (I) a finding that the SFCs were false and misleading; and (2) that defendants repeatedly or persistently used the SFCs to conduct business.

                                20 The defendant borrowers did not default on any loans; but we only know that with hindsight. Markets are volatile, and borrowers come in all shapes and sizes. The next borrower, or the one after that, might default, and if its SFCs are false, the lender might unfairly be left holding the bag. This will distort the lending marketplace and deprive other potential borrowers of the opportunity to obtain loans and create wealth.

                                21 The subject loans made the banks lots of money; but the fraudulent SFCs cost the banks lots of money. The less collateral for a loan, the riskier it is, and a first principal of loan accounting is that as risk rises, so do interest rates. Thus, accurate SFCs would have allowed the lenders to make even more money than they did.

                                © Copyright Original Source



                                The Trumps' fraud was a good con for bank executives willing to lend, too. As some folks have remarked, over-valued loans get good bonuses. If the loan defaults and the assets aren't equitable, it's not the executives who pay out, it's the shareholders.

                                And fraud is fraud: c'mon, people, it fills the eighth circle of Hell.

                                blakepitdiseasefalsifiers.jpg

                                -Sam

                                "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by carpedm9587, Today, 01:47 PM
                                16 responses
                                61 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 06:19 PM
                                13 responses
                                78 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by carpedm9587, Yesterday, 02:28 PM
                                38 responses
                                213 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 12:58 PM
                                15 responses
                                83 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post NorrinRadd  
                                Started by seer, Yesterday, 10:47 AM
                                55 responses
                                284 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Working...
                                X