Judge Rules Trump Committed Fraud, Stripping Control of Key Properties

I'm sure Trump will be able to go three years without doing any business in that filth hole. He could have took all his businesses there and moved them out of the state.

There will be some businesses that would likely move out of the NYC New York City is becoming to dangerous and some areas have rat infestation. Getting rid of the rats isn't the only problem...
 
I'm sure Trump will be able to go three years without doing any business in that filth hole. He could have took all his businesses there and moved them out of the state.

Next headline:

Trump forbidden by judge to move businesses out of state. Must remain even if it means losing money.
 
Just because some other people don't report their worth correctly doesn't make what Trump did legal. You are missing my point, you all should be arguing that Trump was selectively prosecuted. Not that he is innocent, because he is not.

It's a subjective valuation. The lender(s) had every right to refuse the valuation, or request a new one, or flat out refuse the loan.

They weighed the risk to reward, found it agreeable, and issued the loans and credit lines.

All of which were paid back at the required interest.

The fact that this is a "selective" prosecution goes without saying.

AG James said she was going to "get Trump" and she did.

Yes, that is also a troubling new advance for the Marxists: the fact that they are now confident in prosecuting anybody, at any time, for any thing.

Because we are all "guilty" of something.

But the fact that he is innocent really pushes the envelope.
 
The problem is, it isn't a prosecution. It's a civil case with no plaintiff. It's an unprecedented persecution.

Thank you! This is insane. Now any prosecutor who doesn't like a political adversary can bring a civil suit against them without a plaintiff and or injured party. There's no way this kind of idiocy can with withstand an appeal.
 
Not that one is crap. But Trump did overstate the total net worth of his assets.

I'm not in real estate, but I have bought and sold a couple of houses. When I bought those houses, the seller asked for a certain amount. My lenders determined whether or not the amount I was asking to borrow was reasonable with regard to the asset. They weren't going to give me $500K to buy a hovel on a quarter-acre (where I live anyway, lol). Thus, it really doesn't matter what the seller (or in Trump's case, he who is suggesting the value of his collateral) values the property at. Responsible banks will independently evaluate the value of the collateral and base their lending decisions on that valuation.

Unless I'm missing something here, I'm not really sure why this is so difficult. Hell, in this case in particular, all you have to do is look at the values of the properties adjacent to Mar-a-Lago...

This seems to me to be a bold and bald-faced political persecution. And if it is, that should concern every American citizen - right, left and middle.
 
I'm not in real estate, but I have bought and sold a couple of houses. When I bought those houses, the seller asked for a certain amount. My lenders determined whether or not the amount I was asking to borrow was reasonable with regard to the asset. They weren't going to give me $500K to buy a hovel on a quarter-acre (where I live anyway, lol). Thus, it really doesn't matter what the seller (or in Trump's case, he who is suggesting the value of his collateral) values the property at. Responsible banks will independently evaluate the value of the collateral and base their lending decisions on that valuation.

Unless I'm missing something here, I'm not really sure why this is so difficult. Hell, in this case in particular, all you have to do is look at the values of the properties adjacent to Mar-a-Lago...

This seems to me to be a bold and bald-faced political persecution. And if it is, that should concern every American citizen - right, left and middle.


Yeah you are missing something. Trump wasn't borrowing based on stated or evaluated value of the purchased property. He was borrowing on the stated value of his total net worth. He exagerated his net worth which got him more lower and more favorable loan rates. This is an unfair trade practice because it gives his company an advantage over those who correctly value their net worth. It's not victimless, those who follow the rules are the victims.

You all can argue that this happens all the time and you aren't wrong. But that doesn't make Trump not guilty of it. When you do things lilke this, you roll the dice you won't get caught, he did.
 
Yeah you are missing something. Trump wasn't borrowing based on stated or evaluated value of the purchased property. He was borrowing on the stated value of his total net worth. He exagerated his net worth which got him more lower and more favorable loan rates. This is an unfair trade practice because it gives his company an advantage over those who correctly value their net worth. It's not victimless, those who follow the rules are the victims.

Admittedly, I was not breathlessly following this "trial," but who exactly were the victims? Do you have specific names?
 
Admittedly, I was not breathlessly following this "trial," but who exactly were the victims? Do you have specific names?

Any company in competition with Trump's in NY that correctly reported it's net worth is a victim. When Trump overstated the value of his company, he received loans at a lower rate with better terms than a company that properly reported their net worth. This creates an unfair advantge for Trump's company. This is an unfair trade practicce. A stockholder or employee of such a company is a victim of Trump, they lose value from his actions.
 
Any company in competition with Trump's in NY that correctly reported it's net worth is a victim. When Trump overstated the value of his company, he received loans at a lower rate with better terms than a company that properly reported their net worth. This creates an unfair advantge for Trump's company. This is an unfair trade practicce. A stockholder or employee of such a company is a victim of Trump, they lose value from his actions.

What was the damage done to "any company"? I haven't seen any actual harm done to anyone. You are speaking hypotheticals.
 
So why didn't any of them sue him? The DA couldn't find any such unicorn?

And it's its, not it's.

What was the damage done to "any company"? I haven't seen any actual harm done to anyone. You are speaking hypotheticals.

I think at this point you both are grasping at straws. Naming of a specific indivual harmed is not legally necessary to win a case of this type.
 
I think at this point you both are grasping at straws. Naming of a specific indivual harmed is not legally necessary to win a case of this type.

It's a civil suit. There not only has to be a victim, but until now, the victim has always had to instigate the case.

Why are you ignoring that fact? As if victimless crimes weren't bad enough, now we have victimless "damages". Talk about an oxymoron. Courts demanding the government gets paid for imaginary damage done to--who? Nobody's claiming to be a victim of this, even with billions in incentives to make that claim. Talk about a recipe for tyranny.
 
Last edited:
I think at this point you both are grasping at straws. Naming of a specific indivual harmed is not legally necessary to win a case of this type.

If naming a victim is not required, then what is Trump guilty of, exactly? I've never been a fan of Soviet-style show trials.
 
I think at this point you both are grasping at straws. Naming of a specific indivual harmed is not legally necessary to win a case of this type.

So you can't identify any actual victims, and you can't specify any actual damages - but other people are the ones "grasping at straws"?

:rolleyes:
 
Ok, the orange one can do no wrong and runs big beautiful perfect businesses, you all win. I explained, you all don't accept the reality of the situation, I'm done.
 
Any company in competition with Trump's in NY that correctly reported it's net worth is a victim. When Trump overstated the value of his company, he received loans at a lower rate with better terms than a company that properly reported their net worth. This creates an unfair advantge for Trump's company. This is an unfair trade practicce. A stockholder or employee of such a company is a victim of Trump, they lose value from his actions.
The lender has the final sayso on the value.
Maybe Trump gets better rates because he's a good customer?
 
Ok, the orange one can do no wrong and runs big beautiful perfect businesses, you all win. I explained, you all don't accept the reality of the situation, I'm done.

The only ones denying reality is yourself, the prosecutor and the judge. The idea that your property is only worth what the county assessor has it listed at is ridiculous. County assessments are always under the true value and then increases are capped until the property is sold. It's very likely that you, the prosecutor and the judge all misrepresented your property values when getting loans in the same way. Your TDS is clouding your judgement, and you're willing to go along with a malicious prosecution.
 
Back
Top