Letitia James fraud case victory in question?

[Couchpotato]

Which, they did.

The entire point of the submitted financial statements is that the banks can rely on them.

Banks don't have to account for felonies.

And the bank said they did their assessment of Trumps net worth and gave him the loan. So who was defrauded again?

If Trump wasn’t running for President this case is never brought.

 

[konradv]

And the bank said they did their assessment of Trumps net worth and gave him the loan. So who was defrauded again?

If Trump wasn’t running for President this case is never brought.

He defrauded everyone who would have legitimately qualified for the loan.

#LOCKHIMUP

 

[westwall]

So if I shoot at you and miss, I haven't harmed you.. Yet it is a crime.

Not one bank said they were harmed. So, who was harmed?

 

[konradv]

Not one bank said they were harmed. So, who was harmed?

Banks were harmed, if they lost out on profits by giving a deal to someone who didn’t deserve it. Customers who were denied loans despite having better financials, were also harmed.

#WAKEUP

 

[Couchpotato]

He defrauded everyone who would have legitimately qualified for the loan.

#LOCKHIMUP

lol. What’s their name? Name one person who didn’t get a loan

 

[konradv]

lol. What’s their name? Name one person who didn’t get a loan

Assigning blame was the jury’s job. How do you expect me to name names? Your little quizzes make no sense. If there weren’t any victims, the jury would have acquitted.

#SORELOSERS

 

[struth]

Banks were harmed, if they lost out on profits by giving a deal to someone who didn’t deserve it. Customers who were denied loans despite having better financials, were also harmed.

#WAKEUP

The banks testified they happy with him as a customer and he repaid his loans, they were happy to loan to him again.

 

[struth]

Assigning blame was the jury’s job. How do you expect me to name names? Your little quizzes make no sense. If there weren’t any victims, the jury would have acquitted.

#SORELOSERS

So, you are full of it?

There was no jury you idiot

 

[j-mac]

That does not absolve the business from being truthful in it's required filings of legal documents.

You are correct in that the lender is free to make their own assessment, however we are talking a home loan here. We are talking high finance with the "collateral" being spread across the country and even internationally.

WW

Is your argument really, it’s too hard to assess the values, so the bank just went with it?

That’s dumb…

 

[konradv]

So, you are full of it?

There was no jury you idiot

Sorry, he’s had so many convictions! Let’s see fraud, sexual assault, plus more pending. It’s hard to keep tabs.

#LOCKHIMUP

 

[konradv]

The banks testified they happy with him as a customer and he repaid his loans, they were happy to loan to him again.

Cite the testimony.

#MAGALIES

 

[ThisIsMe]

James didn't prosecute Trump's real estate dealings. She prosecuted him for falsifying his business records.

Same issue. Has this practice happened in the past in the real estate world? If so, has it ever been previously prosecuted? If not, then why now?

That’s what I understood from the question the judge asked.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Too deep would just mean less of a fine, not exoneration.

#DIRTYDON

Or, applying a law that has never been used to prosecute anyone else

 

[konradv]

Or, applying a law that has never been used to prosecute anyone else

How many times have they tried that one?!

#LOCKHIMUP

 

[ThisIsMe]

How many times have they tried that one?!

#LOCKHIMUP

No idea, if it’s never been done before, this will be a first.

 

[Couchpotato]

Assigning blame was the jury’s job. How do you expect me to name names? Your little quizzes make no sense. If there weren’t any victims, the jury would have acquitted.

#SORELOSERS

You can’t name a victim because there wasn’t one. Well there was it’s all of us because political prosecutions hurt everyone.

 

[struth]

Cite the testimony.

#MAGALIES

Banker involved in big loans to Trump Organization testifies in civil fraud trial

A Deutsche Bank executive says the bank followed its own guidelines — which include independently verifying information — when deciding to lend Donald Trump's company hundreds of millions of dollars.

www.pbs.org

Deutsche Bank reviewed the financial statements before making the loans through its department that works with rich individuals — a pathway that allowed for more favorable interest rates than likely available from the commercial real estate division, according to the lawsuit. The deals came with conditions about Trump’s net worth and, sometimes, liquidity, and they often required annual submissions of his financial statements.

But, testifying for the defense, managing director David Williams said the bankers viewed clients’ reports of their net worth as “subjective or subject to estimates” and took its own view of such financial statements.

“I think we expect clients-provided information to be accurate. At the same time, it’s not an industry standard that these statements be audited. They’re largely reliant on the use of estimates,” Williams said, so bankers routinely “make some adjustments.”

 

[struth]

Sorry, he’s had so many convictions! Let’s see fraud, sexual assault, plus more pending. It’s hard to keep tabs.

#LOCKHIMUP

There is no doubt that you are clueless to the topic

 

[westwall]

Banks were harmed, if they lost out on profits by giving a deal to someone who didn’t deserve it. Customers who were denied loans despite having better financials, were also harmed.

#WAKEUP

No, they weren't. Every bank did their due diligence and every bank made money.

There was no harm. It is a fiction claimed by a corrupt politician.

 

[konradv]

No, they weren't. Every bank did their due diligence and every bank made money.

There was no harm. It is a fiction claimed by a corrupt politician.

Whether they made money isn’t the question and their “due diligence” seems to be lacking and does not exonerate Trump.

#LOCKHIMUP