Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hey, if he has to pay the money, fine, but as long as they don’t stand in his way should he decide to incorporate OUT of New York, that’s fine.
Something tells me they would thought.
There is only 2 things that stands in his way of rebuilding his business, 4 up coming trials and his age. Assuming Trump survives the criminal trial, he will be 77 years old. That's pretty old to start rebuilding a business after the court's restriction. And if he wins the president, he will leave office an old man, the same age as Biden, 81. What he should be doing is winding down his business career and turning it over to his kids.Once he pays the judgement there will be no problem with him setting up a new business and shifting any remaining assets.
Moving states as a way to try to get out of the judgement won’t work though.
WW
And all of his assets mortgaged to the eyeballs already, with no banks wanting to lend to him..So he sells his licenses. "Pay me to use my name", fleecing the sheep.Everyone grab a pair of shears, there's enough for everyone! It's not even a secret.Nothing is stopping him except for a few hundred million
There is only 2 things that stands in his way of rebuilding his business, 4 up coming trials and his age. Assuming Trump survives the criminal trial, he will be 77 years old. That's pretty old to start rebuilding a business after the court's restriction. And if he wins the president, he will leave office an old man, the same age as Biden, 81. What he should be doing is winding down his business career and turning it over to his kids.
And all of his assets mortgaged to the eyeballs already, with no banks wanting to lend to him..So he sells his licenses. "Pay me to use my name", fleecing the sheep.Everyone grab a pair of shears, there's enough for everyone! It's not even a secret.
Fraudulent applications are submitted in order to get lower interest loans. The bank can do only so many low interest loans thus those people that submit honest applications may be deprived the low interest loans that go to those that lie on their applications. Thus NY has a law.
He was president. Meaning prosecution is hard if not impossible. After he stopped being President he was charged. It's also simply not important.
A crime is a crime. It's telling that the arguments always carry some form of special pleading.
"It's a victimless crime."
"They waited to long."
" Other people have gotten away with it."
"The judge is biased."
" The prosecutor is biased."
"It's all political."
I've yet to see anybody on the right actually deny the factual allegations. In fact I can ask all of you to actually read what is said and I know none of you will.
And all of his assets mortgaged to the eyeballs already, with no banks wanting to lend to him..So he sells his licenses. "Pay me to use my name", fleecing the sheep.Everyone grab a pair of shears, there's enough for everyone! It's not even a secret.
I don't mind doing that considerable amount of work you are reluctant to actually do yourself.When did these loans take place again? Weren’t they at least 5 years prior to Trump becoming President?
Why don’t you quote me what you think are the relevent sections in the judgement. I did read where the judge made the point to use a tax evalutation as a point of reference, which is ridiculous. With regards to Mar-A-Largo, the judge mentioned what some appraisers thought the property was worth is pure speculation, particularly given the historical significance of Mar-a-Largo and the fact that it was owned by Trump. The property is worth what someone is willing to pay and the property was not up for sale. If the bank had a problem with his assessment, they should have brought that up before giving him the loan. They didn’t because a) they knew Trump corporation was worth it, b) they stood to make a lot of money and c) they wanted the loan for publicity reasons. If they hadn’t given it to him, another bank would have.
I don't mind doing that considerable amount of work you are reluctant to actually do yourself.
On 1 condition.
You actually address the things I source by either conceding it is indeed fraudulent, or stating a coherent reasoning why it isn't.
Crusaderfrank yesterday wanted me to source cases were this statute was used specifically in how it was used against Trump. In all particulars. While refusing to read the thing being commented on.
If you want me to do your due diligence for you. It's more than reasonable for me to ask you to actually address the results.
Mazars.Sure, I will address them and will have many responses which you will need to address as well. Are you willing to address the non-legal, but very much relevant, point as to why they didn’t choose to take up this case until Trump became president? They had at least 5 years to do so but showed absolutely no interest. Maybe we should take what the NY attorney general said in 2018 when running for office regarding how she was going to “use every area of the law to investigate President Trump and his business dealings and that of his family as well.” It’s politics stupid. EVERYBODY with a shred of common sense knows this. If you don’t, then may you don’t have any.
www.cbsnews.com
Mazars.
Bender made absolutely clear that under the terms of the engagement for compilation services, the client was responsible for ensuring that assets were stated at their estimated current values, and that Weisselberg was responsible for determining which GAAP departures were identified and disclosed. TT 237-238, 319-320. The engagement letters, signed by a combination of Weisselberg, Donald Trump, and Donald Trump, Jr., confirmed this by unambiguously acknowledging that Donald Trump, through his trustees, was responsible for the preparation andfair presentation of the personal financial information in accordance with GAAP. See, e.g., PXThis is an answer to the question of who's responsibility it is to make sure financial statements are accurate. Page 7
Deutsche Bank.
Haigh relied on Donald Trump’s2011 SFC and assumed that the representations of value of the assets and liabilities were “broadly accurate.” TT 1009-1010; PX 330. The Deutsche Bank Credit Report’s “Financial Analysis” is based on numbers provided by the “family office” (here, the Trump Organization) and contains the same numbers represented in the SFC.
Same question page 9
The covenant obligated Donald Trump to provide an annual financial statement. Haigh stressed that
the annual SFCs were required because “[t]he bank wants to be sure that the client’s financial strength is being maintained
This speaks to the fraud being persistent and ongoing for the entire term of the loan. Answering at least in part why it falls within the statute of limitations. Page 10
Appraisal.
Larson testified clearly and credibly that although his name is cited as the source to justify a2.940
capitalization (on Niketown, a property in which Donald Trump owned two long-term leases on 57th Street, Larson never had a specific conversation with Jeffrey McConney in which he advised him that such a cap rate would be appropriate; nor was he aware that he was listed as a source for such a cap rate.
An appraiser was literally used as a source for property without ever agreeing to the rates suggested. Page 12 Also included Trump Tower By the way.
Notwithstanding, the 2015 SFC backup data double-counted the Dean & Delucalease. McConney also chose a much lower cap rate than that on the appraisal and listed the total value of 40 Wall Street at over $735 million, citing Larson as the source.
And again.
By at least June 2014, Dillon became aware that the Trump Organization’s rights to build units at
Briarcliff had been reduced from 71 units to 31 units. PX 3261; TT 2701-2702. Notwithstanding, the supporting data for every SFC from 2015-2021 values Briarcliff as if it had the right to build 71 units, and, indeed, explicitly states:
“Sale of 71 Mid-Rise units approved.”
PX 731, 742, 758, 774, 843, 857, 1501
Valuating a property at 71 units when you're only allowed to built 31.
Mcconney
McConney was aware that Donald Trump had no right to withdraw funds from his interest inVornado Partnerships, and yet he listed the interest on the SFCs from 2013 to 2021 as if it werecash immediately available to Donald Trump. TT 617-626, 5019.
When valuing Trump Park Avenue on the SFCs, McConney knowingly valued rent-regulated apartments using an anticipated selling price that assumed not only that the apartments were unrestricted, but that they had already been renovated, thus failing to discount future value to present value.
McConney ignored several Seven Springs appraisals commissioned by the Trump Organization that valued the potential seven-mansion development at between $5.5 million and $21 million and instead valued the seven-mansion development at $161 million, citing Eric Trump as the source.
McConney testified that for every SFC, Donald Trump valued Mar-a-Lago as if it were a private residence and not a social
club, despite knowing that “Mar -a-Lago is a social club.”
Initially, when questioned by OAG, McConney denied that Allen Weisselberg ever asked him to commit fraud on behalf of the Trump Organization. However, when confronted with hissworn testimony from the criminal trial, McConney admitted that Weisselberg did, on more than one occasion, ask McConney to assist him in committing tax fraud. TT 776-778. He further conceded, after initially denying, that even though he knew these activities were illegal at thetime he was performing them, he continued to assist Weisselberg in committing fraud, as he was afraid that if he refused Weisselberg’s requests he would lose his job.
Plaintiff questioned McConney about his“Separation Agreement”with the Trump Organization, pursuant to which was to receive $500,000, to be paid in installments, the last of which remainsoutstanding. TT 5075. Plaintiff questioned him as to whether his agreement includes the same covenant found in Weisselberg’s
separation agreement that prohibits voluntary cooperation with
governmental investigations or any entity “adverse” to the Trump Organization.
He and Weisselberg are literally being paid not to flip. Page 28
These are just some quick highlights. It goes on and on. So tell me is this fraud or not?
Read the full decision in Trump's New York civil fraud case
The judge's ruling orders former President Donald Trump and his company to pay $354 million in fines, plus almost $100 million in interest, and restricts Trump's business activities in the state.
Sure. Your turn first. Only fair I asked first.Are you going to respond to my questions regarding the timing and regarding the NY Attorney General's comments in 2018?
Sure. Your turn first. Only fair I asked first.
You asked me to source relevant passages after I've been asking you.. or anyone for that matter to read the ruling before commenting. In any case I put out what you asked.Actually, I asked first, but you didn't respond. We ALL know why Trump was pursued. EVERYBODY knows, even you know...deep down.
You asked me to source relevant passages after I've been asking you.. or anyone for that matter to read the ruling before commenting. In any case I put out what you asked.
You are reneging?
I never refuse to answer a premise if asked. I might miss one on occasion, especially when the post is dense and makes multiple claims. Intentionally being evasive. No.No, are you? I will respond, however, much has to do with how you answer my questions.
Businesses will think twice about doing business in NY because of this. Maybe if they donate enough to the DNC, they will be immune.
Mazars.
Bender made absolutely clear that under the terms of the engagement for compilation services, the client was responsible for ensuring that assets were stated at their estimated current values, and that Weisselberg was responsible for determining which GAAP departures were identified and disclosed. TT 237-238, 319-320. The engagement letters, signed by a combination of Weisselberg, Donald Trump, and Donald Trump, Jr., confirmed this by unambiguously acknowledging that Donald Trump, through his trustees, was responsible for the preparation andfair presentation of the personal financial information in accordance with GAAP. See, e.g., PXThis is an answer to the question of who's responsibility it is to make sure financial statements are accurate. Page 7
Deutsche Bank.
Haigh relied on Donald Trump’s2011 SFC and assumed that the representations of value of the assets and liabilities were “broadly accurate.” TT 1009-1010; PX 330. The Deutsche Bank Credit Report’s “Financial Analysis” is based on numbers provided by the “family office” (here, the Trump Organization) and contains the same numbers represented in the SFC.
Same question page 9
The covenant obligated Donald Trump to provide an annual financial statement. Haigh stressed that
the annual SFCs were required because “[t]he bank wants to be sure that the client’s financial strength is being maintained
This speaks to the fraud being persistent and ongoing for the entire term of the loan. Answering at least in part why it falls within the statute of limitations. Page 10
Appraisal.
Larson testified clearly and credibly that although his name is cited as the source to justify a2.940
capitalization (on Niketown, a property in which Donald Trump owned two long-term leases on 57th Street, Larson never had a specific conversation with Jeffrey McConney in which he advised him that such a cap rate would be appropriate; nor was he aware that he was listed as a source for such a cap rate.
An appraiser was literally used as a source for property without ever agreeing to the rates suggested. Page 12 Also included Trump Tower By the way.
Notwithstanding, the 2015 SFC backup data double-counted the Dean & Delucalease. McConney also chose a much lower cap rate than that on the appraisal and listed the total value of 40 Wall Street at over $735 million, citing Larson as the source.
And again.
By at least June 2014, Dillon became aware that the Trump Organization’s rights to build units at
Briarcliff had been reduced from 71 units to 31 units. PX 3261; TT 2701-2702. Notwithstanding, the supporting data for every SFC from 2015-2021 values Briarcliff as if it had the right to build 71 units, and, indeed, explicitly states:
“Sale of 71 Mid-Rise units approved.”
PX 731, 742, 758, 774, 843, 857, 1501
Valuating a property at 71 units when you're only allowed to built 31.
Mcconney
McConney was aware that Donald Trump had no right to withdraw funds from his interest inVornado Partnerships, and yet he listed the interest on the SFCs from 2013 to 2021 as if it werecash immediately available to Donald Trump. TT 617-626, 5019.
When valuing Trump Park Avenue on the SFCs, McConney knowingly valued rent-regulated apartments using an anticipated selling price that assumed not only that the apartments were unrestricted, but that they had already been renovated, thus failing to discount future value to present value.
McConney ignored several Seven Springs appraisals commissioned by the Trump Organization that valued the potential seven-mansion development at between $5.5 million and $21 million and instead valued the seven-mansion development at $161 million, citing Eric Trump as the source.
McConney testified that for every SFC, Donald Trump valued Mar-a-Lago as if it were a private residence and not a social
club, despite knowing that “Mar -a-Lago is a social club.”
Initially, when questioned by OAG, McConney denied that Allen Weisselberg ever asked him to commit fraud on behalf of the Trump Organization. However, when confronted with hissworn testimony from the criminal trial, McConney admitted that Weisselberg did, on more than one occasion, ask McConney to assist him in committing tax fraud. TT 776-778. He further conceded, after initially denying, that even though he knew these activities were illegal at thetime he was performing them, he continued to assist Weisselberg in committing fraud, as he was afraid that if he refused Weisselberg’s requests he would lose his job.
Plaintiff questioned McConney about his“Separation Agreement”with the Trump Organization, pursuant to which was to receive $500,000, to be paid in installments, the last of which remainsoutstanding. TT 5075. Plaintiff questioned him as to whether his agreement includes the same covenant found in Weisselberg’s
separation agreement that prohibits voluntary cooperation with
governmental investigations or any entity “adverse” to the Trump Organization.
He and Weisselberg are literally being paid not to flip. Page 28
These are just some quick highlights. It goes on and on. So tell me is this fraud or not?
Read the full decision in Trump's New York civil fraud case
The judge's ruling orders former President Donald Trump and his company to pay $354 million in fines, plus almost $100 million in interest, and restricts Trump's business activities in the state.
All of this to say that Trump may have exaggerated the value of his real estate holdings. As usual, Democrat are missing the larger point here, which is that this is nothing but a political stunt as this law is not typically applied in such a way.
"These cases typically involve many victims who lost large sums of money to businesses that exploited their poor financial savvy, according to legal experts.
Defendants in those cases have run the gamut, from chicken suppliers to crypto exchanges and loan sharks. A common thread is often a large group of victims who were exploited because the did not know any better, according to legal experts."
"The attorney general's job is to protect people who can't protect themselves," Syracuse University law professor Gregory Germain said. "Here, we're dealing with very sophisticated lenders who are fully capable of protecting themselves and haven't asked the attorney general for help."
Banks have very sophisticated financial experts, particularly when it comes to very large business loans. They do their own due diligence, as they should. I guess we are supposed to believe that banks give large loans based on whatever arbitrary value a potential client puts on their assets. These bank determined that Trump was good for the loans and they were proven to be correct. The bank could have called the Trump Organization out on his property evaluations but chose not to for risk of losing the loan. They also could have proposed higher interest rates which they didn't do for the same reason. The bank knew the organization may have gone elsewhere to secure these loans, which were VERY lucrative for the bank. They were proven to be absolutely correct in their assessment in that they secured the deal and made a lot of money.
This entire thing is nothing more than an attempt at election interference under the guise of enforcing the law. It is absurd that you can't see that.
Now, answer my questions. Why wasn't this brought up prior to Trump becoming President and why did James specifically target Trump and his family when running for the Attorney General position in 2018?
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump...peal-may-hinge-no-victims-defense-2024-02-16/
If you make false statements in order to financially benefit yourself you aren't "exaggerating", you are committing fraud. Something I'm sure you get in any other context. If I write a check that I know is no good, I'm not exaggerating my net worth I'm committing fraud.All of this to say that Trump may have exaggerated the value of his real estate holdings. As usual, Democrat are missing the larger point here, which is that this is nothing but a political stunt as this law is not typically applied in such a way.
It's absurd that you say you're going to respond to something. When considerable effort is being exerted into compiling it, only to, when it comes down to it, minimizing VERY specific charges as "exaggerations" and pretend that's an answer.This entire thing is nothing more than an attempt at election interference under the guise of enforcing the law. It is absurd that you can't see that.
Because the investigation started when they got Cohen in 2018 WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT. Causing an examination into Trump's financial dealings. Here are the key events in the investigation into the Trump family business.Now, answer my questions. Why wasn't this brought up prior to Trump becoming President and why did James specifically target Trump and his family when running for the Attorney General position in 2018?
