A scam and a disgrace

[WorldWatcher]

Wrong.
I am far left and dislike Trump, but the judge is the criminal.
The law is clear that banks are required to run their own independent evaluation, so fraud by Trump is impossible.
In fact, the law the prosecutor is using, was intended only for those selling stocks.
The judge has to know that.
So it is the judge who is deliberately committing fraud.

That does not relieve FPOTUS#45 and the Trump Organization from fraudulant and illegal activities as part of their business practices.

WW

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The law is clear that banks are required to run their own independent evaluation,

you of course have a link to this law and the part of the law that says them failing to do so means that there cannot be fraud against them.

 

[OldFlame]

I am saying the banks not following their policies does not change if fraud was committed or not

What law are you citing Trump broke? Why isn't the SEC going after this bank?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

What law are you citing Trump broke?

I am not citing any law, the AG in NY did that. You are more than free to read the charge and the judges ruling.

Why isn't the SEC going after this bank?

For what?

 

[Rigby5]

He lied on the forms, that is breaking the law...

If you drive home drunk you have broken the law, doesn't matter if you didn't kill anyone.

If Trump told the truth he would have been deemed a higher risk and would possibly have had to pay higher premiums and put up more collateral.
Since Trump has a history of owning companies that go bankrupt , he knew this...

This is very much a crime... It is a white collar crime, a crime for the rich... You make a lot more doing this than robbing the bank by gun point... And the whole time he can rely on idiots to say it is not crime cause no one got shot...

Wrong.
What he submitted was standard promotional advertising, since that is all he would have ever had.
Puffing for sales, is not fraud.
Everything on a real estate evaluation is subjective.
For example, how big is the penthouse?
It depends on how many of the top floors you decide you want to count?
It depends on if you want to count parking sub-basement space, basement swimming pools, exercise rooms, etc.

It is illegal for a bank to use a customer evaluation.

If the bank evaluated the property lower, it would NOT at all have effected collateral or premiums.
When a property evaluates lower, then the size of the loan is reduced and that is all.
When a property evaluates lower, then the insurance premiums are reduced, not increased.

 

[WorldWatcher]

What law are you citing Trump broke?

New York State Executive Law 62(12).

Why isn't the SEC going after this bank?

#1 The SEC is a Federal entity, this was charged under state law so the SEC doesn't apply.

#2 The banks are not a respondent to the suit for doing anything wrong. The respondent to the suit is FPOTUS#45 and the Trump Organization for repeated fraudulent and illegal business practices.

WW

 

[L.K.Eder]

History has seen trials like this before.

oh. fuck off, jabba.

 

[Rigby5]

I am not citing any law, the AG in NY did that. You are more than free to read the charge and the judges ruling.



For what?

The law the AG is using was never intended for banks or bank loans.
It was intended for securities exchanges that are selling stocks to unwary average citizens.
Average citizens need protection from unscrupulous stock sellers.
Banks do NOT need protection from loan applicants.
And in fact it is illegal for banks to not run independent appraisals.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And in fact it is illegal for banks to not run independent appraisals.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

It is illegal for a bank to use a customer evaluation.

 

[Rigby5]

New York State Executive Law 62(12).



#1 The SEC is a Federal entity, this was charged under state law so the SEC doesn't apply.

#2 The banks are not a respondent to the suit for doing anything wrong. The respondent to the suit is FPOTUS#45 and the Trump Organization for repeated fraudulent and illegal business practices.

WW

Wrong.
All banks are under federal SEC laws.
New York state has no jurisdiction over banks.
The evaluation of a property is entirely subjective, and it is illegal to try to prosecute something without intrinsic and constant value.
The 1956 law, New York State Executive Law 62(12), was intended entirely for securities exchanges, and absolutely NOT for bank loan applications.

 

[Rigby5]

There are over half a dozen such laws, so that is easily done.
Here was the first quick hit.
{...

§1639e. Appraisal independence requirements​

(a) In general​

It shall be unlawful, in extending credit or in providing any services for a consumer credit transaction secured by the principal dwelling of the consumer, to engage in any act or practice that violates appraisal independence as described in or pursuant to regulations prescribed under this section.
...}

 

[airplanemechanic]

The charges were voted on by a jury of his peers, The Constitution is being followed, but apparently MAGA has abandoned it!

No, they weren't. He's NEVER been in front of a jury for ANYTHING.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

There are over half a dozen such laws, so that is easily done.
Here was the first quick hit.
{...

§1639e. Appraisal independence requirements​

(a) In general​

It shall be unlawful, in extending credit or in providing any services for a consumer credit transaction secured by the principal dwelling of the consumer, to engage in any act or practice that violates appraisal independence as described in or pursuant to regulations prescribed under this section.
...}

Does not doing your own appraisal violate appraisal independence?

And if so, would that remove the fraud committed by Trump?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, they weren't. He's NEVER been in front of a jury for ANYTHING.

Because he did not ask for a jury of his peers.

He got just exactly what he asked for

 

[Blaster]

Because he did not ask for a jury of his peers.

He got just exactly what he asked for

You need to get your facts straight.

 

[Rigby5]

Is the previous link good enough for you?
I can find more, but it should be obvious since banks have gotten into trouble over this since 1929, and there have been dozens of attempts to tighten the screws on banks.
But just from general principles, it should also be obvious.
The banks are the big professional experts that deal with thousands of properties.
The loan applicants are the naive hopefuls, without the experience with similar properties, to even be able to do any sort of evaluation.
Putting the responsibility on the naive applicant would clearly be illegal.
The bank has a legal responsibility to protect its investors.
There is no compelling legal basis to demand anything from the applicant.
This is especially true since the loan was repaid, the bank was happy, and there was no victim.
Law does not get its authority from government.
Law only gets is authority from the need to protect the rights of the victims.
Without a victim, there is no legal authority, and instead you have an illegal dictatorship.

 

[Rigby5]

The greatest thing about the NY case is that losing money and his businesses may actually hurt his ego more than prison time. He’d see time as a badge of honor, but being pauperized would be soul destroying for him.

And how do you find it to be legal to take the money someone earned and turn them into a "pauper"?
I do not like Trump, but clearly that is deliberate theft on the part of all the 91 indictment prosecutors AND judges.
They are all criminals.

 

[Rigby5]

You’re right. We have seen trials like this before...Michael Milken, Ivan Boske, Bernie Madoff.

Those people were lying to get naive investors to give them their money.
Those selling people stocks are under fiduciary obligations to not lie.

Trump did nothing at all like that and is under no such legal requirements.

First of all he was dealing with banks who are the experts more than he is, so there is no way he could possibly deceive him.
And there is no possible way to make a law that could make it illegal to apply for any sort of bank loan with any sort of collateral you wanted.
Its totally up to the bank whether or not they want to give it or not.

 

[Rigby5]

The banks would have made $165,000,000 MORE if he was charged the interest rate he qualified for without his certified as the truth, LIES.

he got a better interest rate than any other similar business not lying. Is that a good business ethic and standard for others in business that tell the truth on their certified assets forms?

Wrong.
First of all, by law nothing Trump said or submitted can legally be used by the bank.
So it is impossible to claim he did anything wrong.
Second is that the valuation of the collateral does NOT at all change the interest rates in any way.
All the valuation does is change the amount that the bank is willing to loan.

And there is no such thing as a "certified asset form".

In case you want to look into what the laws really say:
{...

§1639e. Appraisal independence requirements​

(a) In general​

It shall be unlawful, in extending credit or in providing any services for a consumer credit transaction secured by the principal dwelling of the consumer, to engage in any act or practice that violates appraisal independence as described in or pursuant to regulations prescribed under this section.
...}