N.Y. just let corrupt judge screw them.
Feb 21, 2024 18:41:36 #
pendennis wrote:
Wow! The amount of hate in this thread is amazing... (show quote)
Trump will lose on appeal. But he has no appealable issues in Federal Court.
Trump committed the fraud. The banks are incentivized to accept his fraud if they want to do business. But the fraud was illegal, and Trump is a repeat offender.
Feb 21, 2024 19:43:53 #
Effate
Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
jcboy3 wrote:
Trump will lose on appeal. But he has no appealable issues in Federal Court.
Trump committed the fraud. The banks are incentivized to accept his fraud if they want to do business. But the fraud was illegal, and Trump is a repeat offender.
Trump committed the fraud. The banks are incentivized to accept his fraud if they want to do business. But the fraud was illegal, and Trump is a repeat offender.
Incentivized how, by entering into a contract (you know offer, acceptance and consideration) where they profited charging interest on the loan amount and all parties performed? Yes, profit is an incentive for doing business.
Feb 21, 2024 20:13:42 #
jcboy3 wrote:
Trump will lose on appeal. But he has no appealable issues in Federal Court.
Trump committed the fraud. The banks are incentivized to accept his fraud if they want to do business. But the fraud was illegal, and Trump is a repeat offender.
Trump committed the fraud. The banks are incentivized to accept his fraud if they want to do business. But the fraud was illegal, and Trump is a repeat offender.
Just how was anyone defrauded? While Donald Trump's company provided the values of his assets, the contracts were written with advisories that the lenders do their own due diligence as to asset values. None of the loans were defaulted, and the lenders all wanted him as a repeat customer because of his payment history and his name.
His civil rights based on the 5th and 14th Amendment due process clauses, the prejudicial actions of the judge, and the absolute bias of the DA.
Kevin O'Leary has repeatedly stated that the actions of the persecutors (no, I did not use the wrong word) would cost New York billions of lost investment and tax revenue, and that existing investors were already moving their assets out of New York because they fear they'll get the same abuse as Trump.
See my prior post - Trump has taken up permanent residence in your head.
Feb 21, 2024 20:35:51 #
pendennis wrote:
Just how was anyone defrauded? While Donald Trump... (show quote)
And nearly permanent residence in our courts. They do not see him as favorably as you do.
None of what you've posted negates the NY law upon which trump was deemed guilty and liable for ill-gotten gains. They don't call it a "juggernaut" law for nothing.
Feb 21, 2024 21:33:20 #
Effate
Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
Triple G wrote:
And nearly permanent residence in our courts. They do not see him as favorably as you do.
None of what you've posted negates the NY law upon which trump was deemed guilty and liable for ill-gotten gains. They don't call it a "juggernaut" law for nothing.
None of what you've posted negates the NY law upon which trump was deemed guilty and liable for ill-gotten gains. They don't call it a "juggernaut" law for nothing.
From a Jan 29 Associated Press story:
An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.
Remember her campaign promises so could there be any political motivation or disparate treatment.
Feb 22, 2024 00:01:25 #
Effate wrote:
From a Jan 29 Associated Press story:
An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.
Remember her campaign promises so could there be any political motivation or disparate treatment.
An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.
Remember her campaign promises so could there be any political motivation or disparate treatment.
That shut down request didn't happen. I'm not denying that there was some political motivation; just that at some point to make a case, there has to be indisputable evidence and eyewitness testimony showing repeated lawbreaking and pattern to defraud and those were found and determined to be on a scale never before seen. Without the evidence, it's just overblown bluster like in the Hillary and Hunter cases.
Feb 22, 2024 00:32:18 #
Effate
Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
Triple G wrote:
That shut down request didn't happen. I'm not denying that there was some political motivation; just that at some point to make a case, there has to be indisputable evidence and eyewitness testimony showing repeated lawbreaking and pattern to defraud and those were found and determined to be on a scale never before seen. Without the evidence, it's just overblown bluster like in the Hillary and Hunter cases.
Seems to me you are the worst fraudster in the country if your so called victims are paid back in full in accordance with the contracts.
Feb 22, 2024 01:29:00 #
Triple G wrote:
That shut down request didn't happen. I'm not denying that there was some political motivation; just that at some point to make a case, there has to be indisputable evidence and eyewitness testimony showing repeated lawbreaking and pattern to defraud and those were found and determined to be on a scale never before seen. Without the evidence, it's just overblown bluster like in the Hillary and Hunter cases.
When you have a biased judge sitting on the bench, you don’t need indisputable evidence.
Feb 22, 2024 02:04:13 #
Kraken wrote:
Overall, we rate The Epoch Times Right Biased and Questionable based on the publication of pseudoscience and the promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, as well as numerous failed fact checks. (M. Huitsing 8/21/2017) (Updated 05/22/2022)
No American really gives a crap what you think Krajlken. Doesn't Canada have enough problems with Trudeau and other things to keep you busy in your own back yard?
Feb 22, 2024 05:31:36 #
Effate wrote:
Seems to me you are the worst fraudster in the country if your so called victims are paid back in full in accordance with the contracts.
You seem to have a problem with that law then because it doesn't require individually named victims.
Should the big guy get off when the little guys don't? Look up all the white color law fraud victimless crimes. What about the movie stars who paid to have their kids bumped up in the desired school line? Who were the victims - other kids? Who were the victims in trumps case- other insured and borrowers? It's the practice of people getting special treatment because of money, power and position that is illegal. Falsifying documents is just plain wrong.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ak/pr/us-attorneys-office-announces-priority-prosecute-white-collar-financial-crimes-alaska
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/key-figures-fallout-us-college-admissions-scandal-2021-09-13/
Feb 22, 2024 05:38:37 #
Shutterbug1697
Loc: Northeast
pendennis wrote:
Wow! The amount of hate in this thread is amazing... (show quote)
Another MAGA cult member spewing the trump propaganda.
Falsifying business records to obtain a more favorable interest rate on loans is one of the issues in the case.
Falsifying business records to obtain lower insurance rates is another issue in the case.
Falsifying business records to hide a campaign finance violation is another issue in the case.
Failing to employ individuals who actually know what GAAP is, allowed trump to make up fictitious financial statements.
Wasn't it Deutsche Bank where one division wouldn't write a loan, but another division did write the loan?
https://qz.com/how-donald-trump-got-his-deutsche-bank-loans-1849580784
The fact that the trump businesses are privately held, allowed the decades long illusion and facade to go on for so long without being fact checked by independent external auditors.
Publicly held companies regularly go through independent audits to keep them in line with GAAP, as well as ISO Standards.
Actions have consequences, and now trump is suffering the consequences of his decades long actions.
Feb 22, 2024 05:52:19 #
Shutterbug1697
Loc: Northeast
Effate wrote:
From a Jan 29 Associated Press story:
An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.
Remember her campaign promises so could there be any political motivation or disparate treatment.
An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.
Remember her campaign promises so could there be any political motivation or disparate treatment.
Yet once the final verdict was issued, the Judge chose NOT to pull the trump business licenses, didn't he?
The victims were the banks which would have charged trump higher interest rates, and the insurance companies which would have charged higher premiums if they'd collectively known trump's true net worth!
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-civil-fraud-verdict-appeal-may-hinge-no-victims-defense-2024-02-16/
Feb 22, 2024 05:56:29 #
Shutterbug1697
Loc: Northeast
rcarol wrote:
When you have a biased judge sitting on the bench, you don’t need indisputable evidence.
A Grand Jury found sufficient evidence to bring 34 counts against trump, his sons, and his businesses.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-fraud-ruling-new-york-legal-losses/#:~:text=On%20March%2030%2C%202023%2C%20a,the%20writer%20E.%20Jean%20Carroll.
Was the Grand Jury biased?
Feb 22, 2024 09:51:19 #
Shutterbug1697 wrote:
Yet once the final verdict was issued, the Judge chose NOT to pull the trump business licenses, didn't he?
The victims were the banks which would have charged trump higher interest rates, and the insurance companies which would have charged higher premiums if they'd collectively known trump's true net worth!
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-civil-fraud-verdict-appeal-may-hinge-no-victims-defense-2024-02-16/
The victims were the banks which would have charged trump higher interest rates, and the insurance companies which would have charged higher premiums if they'd collectively known trump's true net worth!
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-civil-fraud-verdict-appeal-may-hinge-no-victims-defense-2024-02-16/
You just don't get it! There were no victims!
Banks have the means to conduct their own assessments, and Trump's applications all had the advisory that the lenders should do their own due diligence. Insurance companies retain the right to inspect the property(ies) of their insured, and can use their own property evaluators to determine the risk involved.
The banks and insurance companies also benefited from Trump's name when they sought business from other customers. Trump was seen as a whale by insurers and lenders alike. They also testified to these facts at the trial.
Feb 22, 2024 10:12:14 #
pendennis wrote:
b u You just don't get it! There were no victims... (show quote)
You are the one who just doesn't get that victims aren't necessary for trumps actions to be tried as financial record fraud.
Effate commented that trump is the worst fraudster ever because banks and insurers were happy with the transaction at the time of the deals. I'll bet they aren't now when they know they've been duped. Even worst fraudsters are the parents who paid many times more to get their kids into their preferred schools. In addition to paying more, they got fines and jail terms. Manipulating financial markets is fraud and illegal and should be prosecuted to the highest penalty possible.
You are just on the wrong track here. A claim of no victims is not going to get traction in an appeal under the 63(12) law. The only chance of appeal comes from whether that law has been properly applied to trumps misstating financial records and/or that the fine was not proportional to the amount of ill-gotten gains.
12. Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general may apply, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, for an order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law 3 or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem proper. The word “fraud” or “fraudulent” as used herein shall include any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions. The term “persistent fraud” or “illegality” as used herein shall include continuance or carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct. The term “repeated” as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than one person. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law.
In connection with any such application, the attorney general is authorized to take proof and make a determination of the relevant facts and to issue subpoenas in accordance with the civil practice law and rules. Such authorization shall not abate or terminate by reason of any action or proceeding brought by the attorney general under this section.
https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/executive-law/exc-sect-63/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/10/17/trump-keeps-attacking-this-statute-in-ny-fraud-case-heres-why-his-claims-lack-merit/?sh=5e4e267c7ab8
63(12) was put in place by a Republican.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-powerful-new-york-law-that-finally-brought-trump-to-book
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.