Trump Bond Slashed (Page 2): SteveR " ... especially since none of the banks involved were harmed and actually profited ..." You betray your *Fox full-tilt whitewashing. The Trump's...

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

SteveR wrote:

An appeals court has slashed Trump's bond by 60% to 175 million. See the attached article.

The article also indicates that a Constitutional provision against "excessive fines" may work in his favor on appeal, especially since none of the banks involved were harmed and actually profited by doing business with him.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/legal-experts-say-trumps-whopping-new-york-fee-could-be-excessive-under-constitution-unheard-of

SteveR " ... especially since none of the banks involved were harmed and actually profited ..."
You betray your *Fox full-tilt whitewashing. The Trump's cooked the books and cheated the poor banks out of millions in earnings. That's illegal and you pay the banks back.

*J6 is textbook Murdoch whitewashing. That ends with an ex-president elevating J6 convicts to ... "'hostages and patriots' that must be pardoned." ... and by November MAGA will be wearing the merch. That's the depressing part.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Texcaster wrote:

SteveR " ... especially since none of the ban... (show quote)

Ever try to do an appraisal on your own house when trying to sell or buy? Believe me, the banks admitted to having their own appraisers. They didn't go into the loans blind.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

SteveR wrote:

Ever try to do an appraisal on your own house when trying to sell or buy? Believe me, the banks admitted to having their own appraisers. They didn't go into the loans blind.

So what ?
That “victimless crime “ is all baloney . We have been down this road before. The banks didn’t break the law - trump did.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

DennyT wrote:

So what ?
That “victimless crime “ is all baloney . We have been down this road before. The banks didn’t break the law - trump did.

Like I said, try submitting your own appraisal when buying a new house. Do you really think the bankers were stupid? If the banks really made loans based solely on Trump's appraisal of the properties, then the banks were surely both incompetent and complicit. Or, neither one because they knew they were going to make money.

Triple G

SteveR wrote:

Like I said, try submitting your own appraisal when buying a new house. Do you really think the bankers were stupid? If the banks really made loans based solely on Trump's appraisal of the properties, then the banks were surely both incompetent and complicit. Or, neither one because they knew they were going to make money.

Excuse after excuse:

1) others do it
2) no victims
3) banks aren't complaining

Yet, there's enough evidence to determine fraud. Should trump be immune from being charged?

https://www.jlegal.org/blog/did-donald-trump-engage-in-real-estate-fraud/

National Park

SteveR wrote:

Like I said, try submitting your own appraisal when buying a new house. Do you really think the bankers were stupid? If the banks really made loans based solely on Trump's appraisal of the properties, then the banks were surely both incompetent and complicit. Or, neither one because they knew they were going to make money.

It's relatively easy for a bank to check your appraisal when you are buying a house. Not so easy to check the value of the varied assets of someone like Trump. Why did Trump lie on his loan applications? Did he think it would get him a more favorable rate? Or did he think he otherwise wouldn't have qualified for theloans?

Whether the banks are incompetent and complicit is irrelevant and doesn't change the fact that Trump lied on his applications and thereby committed fraud. It's not the banks' fault that Trump lied on his applications. It's Trump's fault.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

National Park wrote:

It's relatively easy for a bank to check your appr... (show quote)

Oh, stop twisting in the wind. It's very easy to check to see what a location is being valued at by the local taxing authority for tax purposes. If it's being valued at 850K and the loan applicant claims it's worth 10 million, that's a significant difference that would require verification. Any competent loan organization would not just "trust" the applicant and go with that higher number. C'mon. If New York is going to go after Trump they've also gotta go after the banks. They haven't. In fact, I think if they decided to go after anybody it should have been the banks, not Trump. Do not be surprised, if on appeal, the entire judgment is thrown out.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

SteveR wrote:

Oh, stop twisting in the wind. It's very easy to ... (show quote)

Who cares - trump broke the law!

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

DennyT wrote:

Who cares - trump broke the law!

Don't get him going on about Trump's 'bogus rape'.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

DennyT wrote:

Who cares - trump broke the law!

I break the law every time I speed in my car. Thank goodness I don't get hit with multi-million dollar fines. I'm afraid I might in New York if they knew I was a Republican.

What did Reagan used to say? "Trust but verify." That might be a good motto for the banks. Better yet...."Don't trust until verified."

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Texcaster wrote:

Don't get him going on about Trump's 'bogus rape'.

"For the life of me I couldn't scream."

jcboy3

SteveR wrote:

An appeals court has slashed Trump's bond by 60% to 175 million. See the attached article.

The article also indicates that a Constitutional provision against "excessive fines" may work in his favor on appeal, especially since none of the banks involved were harmed and actually profited by doing business with him.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/legal-experts-say-trumps-whopping-new-york-fee-could-be-excessive-under-constitution-unheard-of

They would have profited more. That's the point.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

jcboy3 wrote:

They would have profited more. That's the point.

Assuming they got the business. The cost of doing business was the low interest. As the bankers said themselves, Trump was good business. They made good money.

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

SteveR wrote:

For huge multi-billion dollar corporations. The fact that the appeals court cut the bond by 60% shows that the bond initially imposed was vastly punitive. We'll see how it plays out. The question still remains whether or not this was a political prosecution.

How can it be a political prosecution, when the crimes date back decades, but the statute of limitations restricted the case to only the most recent years?

Actions have consequences.

The consequences of trump's actions are the net result of the Civil Case!

You get what you pay for.

In trump's case, he chose to pay for a loley bookkeeper as his CFO, when what he really needed was a top notch CPA firm to keep his businesses on the straight and narrow path of legitimacy.

Shutterbug1697 Loc: Northeast

SteveR wrote:

Two totally different offenses. Drunk drivers kill, for one thing. In Trump's case, the banks also had their own appraisers. If you read the article, they were more than pleased to do business with Trump. They made money.

The banks could have made more money IF trump had submitted truthful Financial Statements.

The bank had a duty to their investors to maximize their potential profits with higher interest rates on the trump loans.