Trump Ordered To Pay $364 Million for Inflating His Assets in Civil Fraud Trial
Despite brazenly lying on financial documents and inventing valuations seemingly out of thin air, Trump's lender did not testify that it would have valued his loans any differently.

On Friday afternoon, New York County Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron ordered Donald Trump, his companies, and some executives to pay $364 million. The former president is also barred from serving as an officer or director of any New York business for three years. Trump's lawyers indicated even before the judgment came down that they planned to appeal.
The judgment, part of New York Attorney General Letitia James' civil fraud lawsuit against Trump and his business, the Trump Organization, concerned fraudulent statements made on loan applications that allegedly allowed the former president to get more favorable terms than he would otherwise have qualified for.
For example, in statements submitted to financial institutions, Trump routinely overstated the market value of his properties—including Trump Tower and his Mar-a-Lago beach resort, among others—as Engoron determined in a September ruling. For example, Trump listed Mar-a-Lago's value as high as $612 million, even though the Palm Beach County tax assessor listed its value between $18 million and $27.6 million. Trump Park Avenue contains 12 apartments, whose value Trump reported to lenders at over $3.8 million apiece. But Engoron noted in his September ruling that the units are rent stabilized; taking this into account, the actual appraised value of the apartments is $62,500 per unit.
Most brazenly, Trump reported the size of his penthouse apartment in Trump Tower at 30,000 square feet, when the actual size was just under 11,000 square feet—inflating its valuation by over $200 million.
"The case centered on financial statements that Trump submitted to lenders to help him acquire hundreds of millions of dollars in financing that he used to expand his portfolio of hotels and golf resorts," Jacob Gershman reported at The Wall Street Journal. "Trump borrowed the money at bargain rates after promising to maintain a net worth of at least $2.5 billion."
Key to this net worth, of course, were the documents at issue that routinely overstated the value of Trump's assets. James alleged in her lawsuit that Trump overstated his net worth by as much as $2.2 billion.
While Trump's fabrications were audacious, it's not clear who was actually harmed by them. "Trump never defaulted on the loans, and no one from Deutsche Bank, his principal lender, testified that they would have priced the loans any differently had they known of the alleged inaccuracies," Gershman wrote. "The bank came up with its own, much lower value estimates of Trump's properties using his financial statements as a starting point for its own credit-risk analysis." Trump's lawyers argued that "lenders made a profit and never alleged any breach of contract."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
See, dishonest shit like this is why a fascist like Lancaster has no business working for even an ostensibly libertarian magazine.
Sarc will be by soon to claim he doesn't cheer for lawfare as he cheers for Trump now being found liable for almost 500M.
Commonalities in these cases.
Novel creation of law.
Ignoring of actual harm.
New York judges pre judging the facts.
Democrats.
Not allowing testimony frome the defence
Judge making up his own valuation of the property. (aparently Mar-a-Lago is the cheepest house in the area
The defense was able to present anyone they wanted to testify during the trial phase. This later stage was after the guilty determination had been made.
Mar-a-Lago has a caveat over it. It is only allowed to be used as a private club. It can’t be turned private. It can’t be sub divided.
This is why the valuation is of it as a business and not as a piece of real estate. It’s the same as the rent controlled apartments.
Trump knew this and yet valued it as if the caveat didn’t exist. In the trial he argued the value as if the caveat didn’t exist.
Pretty tough getting past the plain language in the loan forms Trump submitted informing the banks to not rely on his valuation for the properties but to assess them themselves. It's right there in black and white. To think major banks like DB would not do that is silly especially for the amounts in question.
FLAT OUT LIE. There wasn't a trial phase at all. The judge unilaterally DECLARED Trump guilty of fraud and moved directly to the penalty phase. In addition, allowing the DA to file a CIVIL case that didn't even allege the government was among the victims is fraud in and of itself. In civil cases, the person suing MUST have standing to sue and the state didn't even PRETEND to have been harmed.
The prosecutor and judge belong in prison. Like most democrats.
Punk Boogers belong in your booger-rag... Which (booger rag) should be INCINERATED, with the ashes INCARCERATED (in a HIGHLY protected nuclear waste dump), for eternity, AND for etern-Shitty!!!! Encase the ashes in glass nodules, and dump said glass-ass nodules into an ocean-bottom mud-and-muck subduction and seduction zone, to be embraced and isolated by the bowels of the Earth, for many-many millions of years!
Fuck off and die, TDS-addled spastic asshole.
s/prison/cornfield/
Between the United States and Russia, one country just arbitrarily seized the assets of an oligarch opposed to the regime, and is trying to jail him
The other country is Russia
What is dishonest about this?
It was critical of Trump. That is 'dishonest'. The correct position is that Trump is the victim. Of course.
"Despite brazenly lying on financial documents and inventing valuations seemingly out of thin air"
Here you go, shitheads. Those valuations were created by appraisers hired by the company. Whine about the appraisers, but those valuations were not created out of thin air by Trump scrawling in his loan application one night.
Not true. Trump Org inflated the appraisals they paid for. I suggest you read the ruling. It is scathing and conforms to the testimony and the law.
I did, and the ruling's definition inflation was disproved by both the bank loan itself and the appraisals. And of course it was scathing, it was a kangaroo court ruling by fraudsters.
I hope they all end up in the same cell as Mike Nifong.
If you read it then why did you get it so wrong? Plain stupid? Trump apologist? Trump has the money to hire the very best legal team. They did their best but they failed to convince the Judge. They failed to ask for a jury trial. They failed to hire credible experts. They, it seems, failed to even understand NY law. Your fraudsters will not go to jail. Neither will Trump but, once again, he has been found to be a fraudster.
The judge chose to use Florida tax assessment values despite the assessor publicly saying they weren't property evaluations. Lol.
Look at you. Hahaha ha.
Don't worry, he'll pull another quote from a politruk running the show trial to show it was totally legit.
These people should be disbarred and charged with engaging in "conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation".
Mar-a-Lago has a caveat over it. It is only allowed to be used as a private club. It can’t be turned private. It can’t be sub divided.
This is why the valuation is of it as a business and not as a piece of real estate. It’s the same as the rent controlled apartments.
Trump knew this and yet valued it as if the caveat didn’t exist. In the trial he argued the value as if the caveat didn’t exist.
"...Trump apologist?..."
How long have you had a case of TDS, steaming pile of shit?
They failed to convince a partisan hack judge? Surely you are not trotting out that line of bull. If anything it's not Trump that should be in court, it's the banks for breach of duty to their shareholders for loan practices that hurt the banks valuation. Oh, wait...the banks never complained and got all the money so no harm was done. To anyone.
Did they also influence the banks own appraisal?
Lock Him Up! Lock Him Up! lOcK hIm uP!
Yet, the banks loaned the money and were paid back in full with interest. The ruling is bullshit.
Maybe you should read the bullshit ruling.
Glad you admit it is bullshit finally.
Do the world a favor and recycle yourself.
Maybe you should justify the bullshit ruling, legally, for us. Because it doesn't.
We should always listen to judge's opinions on businesses he has literally no clue about.
The belief that banks just go along with the appraised price of a property (in spite of them all saying otherwise mind you) is asinine.
There is NO "subjective" price of real estate until the moment it is sold.
Stuff your TDS up your ass, and then fuck off and die.
So your argument is that a crime isn’t committed so long as the money is paid back.
I can rob a bank … use that money to my benefit … and so long as I return the money I’m all good.
Hey, dumbass, there were agreements drawn up between Trump and the banks. If he defaulted, he would've been on the hook for it. As it is, you demonstrate yourself an ignorant idiot. Banks always do their own due diligence when lending.
This is a civil suit. The argument is no harm no foul. The banks did not claim to be harmed. James is using unproven theoretical harm to claim harm.
Your argument is more akin to Senator and VP Biden holding on to classified documents he should NEVER have had in his possession ... and then returning them once he was caught.
The bank agreed with them
""Not true. Trump Org inflated the appraisals they paid for.""
Not what the bank said. The bank was happy with Trump being a customer. Trump was a star customer. No harm to the bank.
Jeff, you love claiming the AP as your arbiter of truth. Even they say there is no precedent for this case.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-business-law-courts-banks-lending-punishment-1355c3b48cdefa2894ce623ec59748bd
Instead you repeat the talking points of DailyBeast and other left leaning sites.
Awkward.
Democrats don't do awkward. And by that I mean they don't care about logical (and legal) contradiction.
Read up on the Mar-A-Lago appraisals. Comments below have the deets. The fraud is entirely by the government.
“$261 to $291 million. You got to be kidding me!” added Snell, a former prosecutor.
“Just that is it right there. Screenshot that. That’s your exhibit A right there for if you want to know why is he in this much trouble. That’s why,” he added.
“Ten x premium over reality,” Snell continued.
Anchor Katy Tur then jumped in and read from some of Friday’s ruling. “Let me go ahead and read from the specifically the piece in this ruling on Seven Springs. I happened to have it in front of me. ‘From 2011 to 2014, when valuing a plot of land upon which seven mansions could be built in Bedford, Mcconney relied on valuations provided by Eric Trump, who advised Mcconney to value the Seven Mansions development at 161 million on the 2012 SFC,’ which is a financial statement,” she noted, referring to former Trump Org. controller Jeff McConney.
After reading through ruling more she said, ”In August 2013, Eric Trump advised Mcconney to continue to use the undisclosed value, undiscounted value of 161 million for the seven mansion development, despite having received an initial estimate of approximately 5.5 million from Cushman and Wakefield, and goes on just one little portion further.”
“On September 8th, 2014, David McCardle of Cushman Wakefield advised Eric Trump verbally that he had appraised the seven mansion development at 14 million. Notwithstanding, a mere four days later, Eric Trump advised Mcconney to continue using the $161 million value. So on September 8th, he was told that’s 14 million. Four days later, September 12th, he advised Mcconney to continue using the $161 million value so from 14 million to 161. Underscoring your point,” she concluded.
Oh my, he disagreed with one assessor and used a different number. Give him the chair.
I think anyone including myself that has sold a few houses or plots of land has been unhappy with an appraisal so went to a second one and when it came in higher used that one. Appraisals are guestimates on not the tax value or tax assessment but on the selling value using similar properties in the area. On one house I had the tax assessment was a few years old when the sale values had skyrocketed. The tax assessment was over $100,000 less than comparable recent sales. In commercial property it's even harder to get one. If the assessment for a commercial building is $1 Million then something like Covid hits and the building is suddenly 90% vacant with no prospect of tenants coming back anytime soon the building could not be sold for $1 Million. What is it's current value? Who knows but it isn't $1 Million
The same Tristan Snell who wrote the book "Taking Down Trump by Tristan Snell"?
"An indispensable must-read.” — Joy Reid, MSNBC News anchor and host of The ReidOut
Poor commie whore, stick to things you know something about like...drawing a blank there.
Tax assessments first of all often either undervalue or overvalue a property's actual value. Generally, in states with more protections for property owner, they undervalue, and Florida is pretty famous for protecting property owners. The judge using property tax evaluation as his proof of fraud is in itself fraudulent.
He didn't. Read the ruling.
The ruling he made before the case even started? Or the ruling he made subsequent to the first ruling? The second being written in support of the first?
I think this is Lancaster's sock.
Maybe. It's definitely nothing more than a sealion.
Did he also ignore the appraisals made by the banks?
"He didn’t. Read the ruling."
Fuck off and die, steaming pile of shit.
Slickrick is so dim witted!
Yep. Should Cook County, Illinois be held liable the same way as Trump for seriously overvaluing tax assessments on thousands of properties?
A house I have in one state has a tax assessment of about $50,000. I've put some work into it and the real estate values of surrounding properties has gone out of control. The insurance company has a replacement cost of about $300,000. That's just for the building. Who is right?
Court: You lied. Your assest are not worth hundreds of millions.
Same court: Since you lied, we demand you sell those assets and give us the hundreds of millions you get.
Absent Roy Cohen’s services , the Donald needs better commentary than you lot ordinarily provide. Instead of your customary mix of cliche’ and coprolalia , throw the man some ideas assembled into completes sentences for a change!
vvhat would you have them say?
"Trump Park Avenue contains 12 apartments, whose value Trump reported to lenders at over $3.8 million apiece. But Engoron noted in his September ruling that the units are rent stabilized; taking this into account, the actual appraised value of the apartments is $62,500 per unit."
You couldn't buy a mailbox at Trump Park Avenue for 62k.
I'll give Reason credit for putting actual numbers on the valuations and countervaluations. Lets us judge the absurdity for ourselves.
Using the (admittedly extremely basic) estimate of 7% rate of return, that would mean income was $350 per month. Rent stabilization is low, but nowhere near that low.
" . . . it's not clear who was actually harmed by them."
No, Joe, it is absolutely clear that no one was harmed.
I mean the banks even testified they weren't harmed.
It seems that I have to repeat this example for the hard of thinking.
The company treasurer embezzles a million bucks, goes to Vega, somehow wins two million, replaces the million he embezzled. The company wasn't harmed. Is he guilty of anything?
That banks didn't realise the size of the bezzle, and that the bezzle eventually was worth zero isn't relevant. And I am not surprised that the banks didn't want to testify - no-one likes to admit they fell victim to a grifter, particularly when they're supposed to be better at spotting grifters than anyone else. They have self-interest in reporting that all was find and dandy.
HERE is who was harmed!!!!
Is Orange Man bad?!? He BAD, all right! He SOOOOO BAD, He be GOOD! He be GREAT! He Make America Great Again!
We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Poozzy Grasper in Chief!
See The Atlantic article
https://feedreader.com/observe/theatlantic.com/politics%252Farchive%252F2016%252F10%252Fdonald-trump-scandals%252F474726%252F%253Futm_source%253Dfeed/+view
“The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”.
He poozy-snatch His creditors in 6 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me realty schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
All Hail to THE Poozzy Grasper in Chief!!!
Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that ALL of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can poozzy grasp them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of poozzy grasping us right back!
These voters simply cannot or will not recognize the central illusion of politics… You can poozzy grasp all of the people some of the time, and you can poozzy grasp some of the people all of the time, but you cannot poozzy grasp all of the people all of the time! Sooner or later, karma catches up, and the others will poozzy grasp you right back!
You really are getting dumber shrike.
See the Turley link. The banks testified they weren’t harmed. They wanted to continue doing business. But you dumb soros leftists want the law to be used as a weapon.
Not only is your post wrong. It is laughably wrong.
Still not shrike, you liar.
Of course that's how the banks testified, you moron. But at least you've conceded the point that the absence of a loss doesn't mean there was no fraud - and fwiw NY law doesn't require there to be.
ou dumb soros leftists
Well, I'm neither dumb nor a Soros leftist, so your batting average for truth-telling remains in the basement.
But at least you’ve conceded the point that the absence of a loss doesn’t mean there was no fraud – and fwiw NY law doesn’t require there to be.
This is civil court, which means awards are supposedly based on damages. But it is revealing who thinks government should be able to penalize its enemies without regard to the law isn't it?
This is civil court, which means awards are supposedly based on damages.
I suggest you look at the actual statute - 63(12).
It's equally revealing who thinks that Trump should be exempt from any trial despite any acts of his that violate the law.
But it is equally revealing who thinks Trump is above the law.
Libertarians believe laws should only restrict actions which cause actual harm to others, that's why we oppose laws on prostitution and drugs. We routinely criticize prosecutions based on laws that don't fit this model.
This is one of many ways we identify fake libertarians. They can't hide that they don't actually believe the underlying philosophies of libertarianism. Authoritarians believe the law itself is sacrosanct regardless of what it is, which is the philosophy underlying your criticism.
Authoritarians believe the law itself is sacrosanct regardless of what it is, which is the philosophy underlying your criticism.
You just described everyone who says illegal immigrants are illegal.
Tell me you don’t listen to anyone’s arguments without telling me you don’t listen to anyone’s arguments.
Them again we already know this about you.
Keep projecting there, mister two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese...
I remember the good old days when sarc criticized other people for engaging in personal attacks. At least we can count on those days coming back later today.
I’m well aware of the argument for open borders. I don’t need to lie about them to disagree with them, like you’re doing here.
"Libertarians believe..."
Anything that follows those two words is bullshit because libertarians disagree on all kinds of things. That's why I've stopped calling myself a libertarian and instead call myself a classical liberal. The two terms used to be relatively synonymous, but libertarians have gone a bit off the rails.
At least you quit pretending you're a libertarian. Baby steps.
And I am not surprised that the banks didn’t want to testify –
So youre back peddling because you lied? Lol.
Good ole shrike.
Where did I lie? Thinking that banks won't want to testify that they've fucked up?
Typical lying from AssJiz, claiming someone else is lying.
"Where did I lie?..."
Inventing a hypothetical which has no applicability here, shit-for-brains.
Where did the banks fuck up? They loaned the money and got it back with interest. Why is this any business of New York?
"Still not shrike, you liar."
You're Shrike in spirit if not in body, shill.
You’re Shrike in spirit if not in body, shill.
says GoebbelsLament. Spirit, not body.
You're such a dishonest, fucking ignoramus, you should be pleased to be confused with that other dishonest, fucking ignoramus.
The banks did their own evaluation and didn't take into account Trump's numbers and used their own. The bank was completely aware of what was going on.
"The banks did their own evaluation and didn’t take into account Trump’s numbers and used their own."
This has been cited to Jeffy and Diet Shrike at least a hundred times, and every single time they ignore it.
I dismiss it, I don't ignore it.
"Mr Banker, you can either tell the court that your internal systems are fucked, your client audits laughable, your asset evaluation incompetent and your risk management highly deficient, or you can tell the court that you weren't after all taken in by a grifter."
"We weren't taken in."
Because youre a soros loving leftist. Ie pro state.
“Mr Banker, you can either tell the court that your internal systems are fucked, your client audits laughable, your asset evaluation incompetent and your risk management highly deficient, or you can tell the court that you weren’t after all taken in by a grifter.”
You just invented a whole narrative out of thin air that never happened to justify your support for kangaroo court political prosecution.
And even if it were true, which it isn't, it still isn't illegal or even unethical to value your property at a high figure. Value isn't determined by an appraiser, it is solely determined by the purchaser.
This is one of the many reasons why you're a fascist. That you would even try to defend this is disgusting and abhorent.
If you dismiss that the banks do their own appraisals and wouldn’t give him the loans if they didn’t support giving him the loans then you’re completely ignorant. Or a lying fuck.
And since you’re shrike, I’m going with both.
I know enough about how banks work - unlike ignorant cross-burners and incest -ridden clowns like you lot - to know that the practices banks should follow they do not universally follow. You really think that banks execute proper due diligence on every loan? What a maroon.
My favourite example is an old one: https://www.newsweek.com/old-banking-buddies-188804
The reason it's a favourite is that I was teaching a 5-day seminar on risk management to risk managers at Deutsche Bank when the story broke. Perfect.
"The reason it’s a favourite is that I was teaching a 5-day seminar on risk management to risk managers at Deutsche Bank when the story broke. Perfect."
Assuming this is true, whoever hired you ought to be hanging from a lamp-post, TDS-addled shitpile.
What an odd insult. Probably to cover for the obvious lie that follows.
""I know enough about how banks work""
Then you should now that when a customer satisfies the terms of the loan, they are a good customer. Doesn't matter how much they borrowed.
Btw, It's not the banks crying foul that they have been wronged.
So you ARE as big a partisan fuck as shrike.
What a horrible self own bruv.
Diet Shrike: same crappy flavor without the sugar.
You think banks just lend millions on one guy's say so?
The only thing your hypothetical shows is that you don't know what embezzlement is.
Lenders don't use the appraisal values provided by borrowers. They didn't fall victim to anything.
Lenders don’t use the appraisal values provided by borrowers.
Tell me you've never worked in finance without saying you've never worked in finance.
Oh so they don't do their own work and rely on the good will of others? Really? Bullshit. Your response is more in line with tell me you've never tried to get a secured loan without saying you've never tried to get a secured loan.
This thread is telling me that Jeff, slickdick and Diet Shrike have never had a loan.
Who would lend them money?
You lot are unbelievably ignorant. Sure, banks will tend to do proper diligence at an individual level – though as we saw following the 2008 collapse the diligence was often deficient. Though if we believe you and SoldierMedic this never happened and all borrowers were properly analysed. But when you’re dealing with large institutional borrowers, oddly the banks don’t necessarily do what they should, particularly where they’re getting regular fees from refinancing and other services being provided to the same client. I cited one example, earlier.
But I note that none of you has any institutional level financial experience – you’re just talking out of your arses like any clown at a bar with a loudly expressed ignorant opinion. You have no fucking clue how this stuff works in practice.
This is exactly backwards. At the individual level banking interactions and investigations are cursory. As loans become larger and the credit-worthiness more complex bank reviews become vastly more detailed.
This guy has no idea what he's talking about.
Wait, wait. All this allegedly went down *after* 2008 when banks were hyper aware of risks and being more conservative with lending but Trump comes along and puts a spell on them and doesn't do any diligence? They just said nah it'll be fine.
You make up bullshit in your head and use it to excuse your ignorance.
and have never bought, sold, or managed property.
Tell me you’ve never worked in finance without saying you’ve never worked in finance.
It's hard to believe anyone would be stupid enough to die on this hill, but there you are.
Your ignorance does not constitute an argument. You imagine you know how institutional banking always works. You're wrong.
But sure, keep braying. It's what asses do.
For instance, when I still owned cattle, my cows were my collateral. They were young stuff from a good line of genetics, good others etc. I values them at x number of dollars but the bank used the USDA and their own numbers based on that (and their century long history of doing ag loans). My value wasn't taken into account (although it was just a couple hundred dollars difference per head).
Oh and when I sold them out, I got my value on them at auction.
Sure, but you were the little guy. If you were a regular multimillion dollar borrower with huge...tracts of land, and long-term relationships and paying lots of fees, the process won't in practice necessarily be the same.
Assuming your handle is accurate, and you've not shown yourself to be a liar, if someone disbelieved a Navy SEAL exploit because his friends at the local National Guard couldn't have done it, you'd think they were an idiot. They're not comparable. Similarly, small borrowers and huge borrowers aren't comparable.
So you accuse the bank executives of perjury.
New Yorkers who do not break the law and actually pay their taxes are the ones harmed.
Bullshit, since this didn't have anything to do with the taxes Trump paid or how NYS appraised his tax burden. Keep grasping.
Also, what state is Mar a Loga in? Last I checked it wasn't NYS.
Thats why so many new york real estate firms are against the ruling huh?
How many years of the entirety of their business does this open them up to fraud filings for? I'd say every single transaction.
Do you think there isn't a lawyer right now drafting a fraud complaint on behalf of every single buyer/seller that now disagrees with the price based off prior owner tax basis valuations? It will be hilarious watching NY real estate market implode into radioactive rubble the moment this is finalized through appeals.
"New Yorkers who do not break the law and actually pay their taxes are the ones hArMeD."
BY REAL ESTATE VALUATIONS IN FUCKING FLORIDA???
Yes, Trump
Damn you’re dumb as fuck.
And here I thought Molly was gunning for shrikes top spot. DeAnn makes Molly look like a Rhodes Scholar.
From under what rock do these people crawl out?
Joe...
even though the Palm Beach County tax assessor listed its value between $18 million and $27.6 million. Trump Park Avenue contains 12 apartments, whose value Trump reported to lenders at over $3.8 million apiece.
Youre retarded. This valuation is for tax purposes only as the Florida tax assessors plainly stated. It is not for property valuations.
I’m in real estate finance. I always have to tell clients that tax assessments don’t necessarily have any relationship to current market value.
Liars lying to cover the sad-ass and even EVIL lies of those "udders, over there, TWAT poor little old PERFECT MEEEE, who does NO wrong, and tell NO lies, has NOTHING to do with!!!"
Why am I not surprised, Punk Boogers, that a fundamentally dishonest so-called "person" like YOU would put forth these kinds of excuses?
Granted the true value could only be determined at sale by what the buyer will pay. But for your clients looking to refinance a mortgage or get a home equity loan what would you use as the value of the property.
As with most lenders, what the two involved parties consider the terms of valuation. I know you're a state loving leftist. You don't need them involved in every economic transaction.
It has been a while since I last refinanced but I don't recall there being two involved parties. The bank had my property evaluated by their contractor, I paid for the evaluation, and the bank told me the value of the property. My input was paying for the evaluation and that was all.
Ummm. Retard.... the two parties were you and the bank.
You agreed to the banks terms to use a 3rd party assessor they approved of.
Do you get help putting your pants on?
Velcro shoes on this one.
Are we sure it even knows how to put on a shoe, much less velcro them?
“It has been a while since I last refinanced but I don’t recall there being two involved parties.”
Gold.
Funny when I bought a house, my back hired an assessor, and I hired an assessor, and we came to an agreement because there were slight differences
You bought the house so the value was determined by what you would pay the seller. That is a different evaluation from when you own a property and are using it for collateral against a loan.
While the bank may have hired an assessor I doubt they paid the fee. You likely paid for two assessments.
The bank agrees to fund a certain amount of a loan based on the market the value and my ability to pay. If I'm making 100 bucks a week and try and get a 1mil loan for a house that's worth 300k. The bank would rightly tell me to f off. Because if I go bankrupt the bank would not be able to recoup it's money. You really are an idiot
I mean, my car is valued by Missouri statute as worth something like $1200 for tax purposes. I'd be more than a little pissed if it got totaled and my insurance company tried to pay me that amount.
You should totally sue the dealership for fraud in overcharging you for the car originally, this is how retarded this ruling and the malevolent leftists supporting it are.
Came to point that out and that the banks used their own valuations. The only victim here is Trump.
And ALL of the investors who got stiffed when Trump went bankrupt SIX TIMES?!?!?! Chopped liver, are they?
See The Atlantic article
https://feedreader.com/observe/theatlantic.com/politics%252Farchive%252F2016%252F10%252Fdonald-trump-scandals%252F474726%252F%253Futm_source%253Dfeed/+view
“The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”.
He poozy-snatch His creditors in 6 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me realty schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
All Hail to THE Poozzy Grasper in Chief!!!
What the fuck does that have to do with this, Shillsy?
Stupid Bitch, learn to READ!!! I am proving WRONG the lie of the liar who I responded to!!!
Gaear Grimsrud
Came to point that out and that the banks used their own valuations. The only victim here is Trump.
YOU, Perfectly STOOOOOOPID Bitch, are MORE stupid than a dump-truck full of rocks!!!!
Twat, the banks do not CARE if they are NEXT to get shafted by Trump's never-ending bankruptcies?!?! Could it be that they did NOT squawk, because they're AFRAID of Trump getting re-erected, and Trump siccing His Proud Boys on the banks? ... NOOOO! Perfect Trump would NEVER do THAT, right, Perfectly Stupid Tribalist?
Still not getting it Shillsy. I'm guessing you're not really understanding what you're posting again.
Your Perfect Stupidity is NOT my fault!
Officially more retarded than Hihn at the end. Biggest difference being it was sad when he died.
lol, imagine SQRLSY calling someone else a stupid bitch.
Imagine Trump-worshitters still worshitting Trump's financial acumen, when He wants to partially default on the USA's debts. Good faith and credit? Who needs shit?!?!?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/politics/donald-trumps-idea-to-cut-national-debt-get-creditors-to-accept-less.html
Donald Trump’s Idea to Cut National Debt: Get Creditors to Accept Less
After assuring Americans he is not running for president “to make things unstable for the country,” the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, suggested that he might reduce the national debt by persuading creditors to accept something less than full payment.
Asked on Thursday whether the United States needed to pay its debts in full, or whether he could negotiate a partial repayment, Mr. Trump told the cable network CNBC, “I would borrow, knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal.”
He added, “And if the economy was good, it was good. So, therefore, you can’t lose.”
Talk about a stupid bitch!!!!
"Trump listed Mar-a-Lago's value as high as $612 million, even though the Palm Beach County tax assessor listed its value between $18 million and $27.6 million."
Less than every other property in the neighborhood, all are a twentieth of the size.
Suing a man for saying he thinks his house or car or Van Gough is worth more than some tax assessors guess is the height of legal malpractice.
The town has assessed my house at $412,000 for taxes and these fucknuts would want to sue me if I asked $714,0000 which is the current market rate.
Never mind that the bank granted their loan based on their own assessment.
This whole thing is so insanely fascist it's unreal.
Might be time to put Lancaster in the same boat as Dalmia. Somebody who does not know what the fuck they're talking about and is quite proud to prove it ad infinitum.
Whatever happened to Dalmia anyway?
Here visa got revoked?
Same thing that happened to Lucy?
Lucy was too libertarian for this rag. Dalmia, not so much.
Every bank has their own valuation performed, usually by a licensed appraiser. Probably two or three for a high value property like this. Then said valuations are reviewed in house by staff appraisers.
The entire premise for this lawsuit is pure fiction.
sarcasmic 5 months ago
Flag Comment Mute User
Which is more likely, the assessors being off by over two thousand percent, or Trump blowing smoke up somebody’s ass?
.
I’m going with door number two.
.
By the way, assuming the numbers in the article are correct, the banks and insurance companies really dropped the ball in not doing their own valuations
Heh. More.
sarcasmic 5 months ago
Flag Comment Mute User
What is more likely, the government under-assessing a property by 2000% and missing out on all that tasty tax revenue, or someone with a long history of lies and exaggerations lying and exaggerating?
I wonder what the tax value of that Sarcasmic guy getting free rent in your head is? Probably not much
Not rent free at all dummy. He was lying again about be against lawfare. So thought I'd stop him up top. Like how people bring up your love of child porn.
My god you're stupid. Saying that he probably overvalued his properties is not saying he should have been sued or that the judgement was fair. You really need to get your money back for any logic classes you ever took.
I wish my county assessor would value my house at below market. I'd get a break on the property tax. Seems like everything is better in Florida.
If everyone is valued below market similarly, then it's usually a wash (more or less) for actual taxes paid. Unless there has been a market shift for the particular type of property (which has happened to me recently with a family vacation property that has tripled in assessed value in the past 5 years or so).
I think Trump has it classified as a private club instead of a residence, which is a way he's managed to intentionally decrease his tax burden. Which is part of why using the tax assessed value as market value is so insane.
Exactly. MaL cannot be a private residence. Trump signed that away to get hefty tax breaks. Even if it were a private residence Trump's own valuation of the property is 400% higher than any other residence in the USA. Trump used this bogus number to inflate his wealth to prospective lenders and insurers. In NY that is fraud.
Even if it were a private residence Trump’s own valuation of the property is 400% higher than any other residence in the USA.
You are absolutely full of shit. There's a fucking penthouse in New York listed at $200,000,000 as of February 6,. Trump owns a beachfront property mansion.
Try to avoid making your lies so easily and blatantly disproven.
From the ruling:
"Nonetheless, Donald Trump insisted that he believed Mar-a-Lago is worth "between a billion and a billion five" today, which would require not only valuing it as a private residence, which the deed prohibits, but as more than the most expensive private residence listed in the country by approximately 400%."
(p. 36)
Cool. Trump's statement that he believes it's worth that is also not him submitting that as a property valuation, and beyond that, properties like Mar-a-Lago don't get listed on the market basically ever. There's a property in Bel-Air that's appraised over $500 million, so clearly the 400% number is based only on listings instead of actual appraisals.
Beyond that, there's nothing that stops Trump from actually listing the property for $1 billion. But he's not interested in selling it, which itself raises the cost of it.
I was quoting the Judge. Apparently he didn't see that one. A country club that makes a few million a year in profit (according to Trumpster/fraudster) is worth a billion $? 612B? Maybe 50M?
The judge is a moron. Quote away.
"I was quoting the Judge."
So you're not only wrong, you're a fucking statist boot-licker besides.
Eat shit and die, slaver.
Tell me you know nothing about property valuations. You know rezoning happens all the time. See any major residential development project that only splits lots in parts.
And it is a de-facto residence. It can be understood as it's sold that it can be valued that way. Beyond that, it's owned by arguably the most famous person in the America-at a minimum, he's in the top 5. The name value he adds to it by being his residence is significant.
Evidence presented in Court says it is not a residence.
You mean the evidence the judge allowed in court, which many have criticized as being biased and the same judge who found Trump guilty without even hearing Trump's lawyers case? That evidence?
What the fuck! The crooked judge barred almost all the evidence the lawyers tried to submit, and your saying "Evidence presented in Court says it is not"?
No fucking shit. That's one of the reasons that this is a travesty. But that still doesn't mean that there's not a vast pool of evidence you can find yourself that contradicts what the judge allowed.
My township only comps me to the subdivision that I'm technically part of. The house next door which is fewer sq. ft. and on a much smaller lot than mine just sold for 50k over my current assessment. No place to go except up. Unlike most people I don't give a shit what my house is worth because it's not for sale. It's paid for and I'd be happy to live right here until I drop dead. But Illinois has the 2nd highest property tax in the country. If I'm forced to sell it will be because of the taxes.
It was above market 4 years ago.
No one actually believes you have a $400,000 house, let alone a $700,000 one. You live in your mom's basement with Trump posters on the wall.
Better than you living in your mom's basement with Iain Armitage posters on the wall.
Jeff, is a 400k house today impressive to you?
It's impressive for ML.
Big words for a guy living in his moms basement.
I live in BC, fatnazi, that's a three bedroom bungalow.
Also, don't you live in Toronto, Jeff? Your mom's basement alone must be $700k.
Toronto...
Explains why Jeffy is so insufferable, eh.
You know he uses Canadian dollars, right?
Anyway. A $400k USD house is really quite impressive in some parts of the country, and not so much in others. Based on the local market and a lot of other factors. So, what are you on about again?
Nothing, he just hates everyone here and thinks we should all be okay with the government doing this.
(It could never be used against the little guy, said every statist sympathizer ever)
Nice projection you fat pedo.
chemjeff radical individualist 40 mins ago
No one actually believes you have a $400,000 house, let alone a $700,000 one. You live in your mom’s basement with Trump posters on the wall.
I remember the good old days when jeffey pretended to be above childish insults. But no doubt those days will be back soon.
You mean the good old days before the mean girls started calling him a fat pedo and refused to argue in good faith?
Amazing how all you pro pedophile leftists adopted the same arguments lol.
Why would anyone bother arguing in good faith with people who don't argue in good faith? You idiots are only here to attack others, but seem to think you're deserving of respect.
Why would anyone bother arguing in good faith with people who don’t argue in good faith?
I have no idea why anyone would argue with you.
And yet you come here just to argue with people you describe exactly that way. At least try to advance arguments consistent with your actions. It’s embarrassing when you try to insult people without realizing the underlying philosophy doesn’t apply to you.
Also note sarc reads enough of jeffey to always white knight for him, but then pretends he doesn't read jeffey when asked why he doesn't apply the standards he criticizes others based on to jeffey. That was just another sarc lie.
Yes we know. I am the only one held to any standards whatsoever. Everyone else on your team can be as big of assholes as they wish to be and nary a peep comes from you.
Yes we know. I am the only one held to any standards whatsoever. Everyone else on your team can be as big of assholes as they wish to be and nary a peep comes from you.
I hold you to the standards you hold others to, it's pretty amusing you think that's unfair. I recall how offended you are that people note whose arguments you accept without evidence and whose you attack even when it, but here are you doing the same thing you criticize by claiming others are "my team".
Standards: those things left wingers use against others but never apply to themselves.
Everyone is being mean to Jeffy and Sarckles because they punch them back.
It's like when the bullies cry they're being bullied when someone punches them back.
That's silly. The club next door is half its size and has more beachfront.
You are forgetting that Mar-a-Lago comes with significant deed restrictions that will affect the price. Those deed restrictions also gave the property a favorable evaluation for tax purposes. Forbes put the value at $325M of about half the Trump value.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2023/09/27/trump-family-insists-mar-a-lago-worth-over-1-billion-after-judge-calls-value-wildly-inflated-heres-what-we-know/?sh=504c7cb05541
This is irrelevant. Value is subjective.
You probably think your value in life is greater than it actually is. No one should prosecute you for it.
Turley weighs in.
https://twitter.com/simonateba/status/1758590478436450522
I still have yet to see any explanation (even a bad one) of why the state of New York has any standing here. How was the state harmed? There are a lot of insane cases against Trump right now, but this one takes the cake I think.
There was a writeup last week that Trump has had to spend over 50M on legal fees with all these cases. They goal is to bankrupt him.
Yeah, obviously the goal is to get him with whatever they can. But you'd think there would be some kind of legal theory to back it up. Since when do states sue people over private business transactions?
Since it was Trump. The only case that comes close to a non novel legal theory is the classified docs case. But even there they have to ignore the PRA precedent decided under Clinton at the DC circuit and also ignore how they let all other politicians get away with it.
When those transactions breach the law, obviously.
So it's a legalist argument, now? Not a philosophical or moral one? If we write a law that says nobody can own a computer, are we all criminals?
The law has to have some basis in correcting a knowable harm.
Not so long as the obnoxiously arrogant POS can see some way of harming Trump.
A law that has never been interpreted in this manner and had the entire NY real estate industry against it? Lol.
lol, it's his PAC that is paying his legal bills. Do you really think Trump is that stupid to permit *himself* to pay his own bills when he can get his marks to do it for him?
Citation? If that’s true, is that better or worse then this witchhunt funded with our tax dollars? You disingenuous cow.
Yeah, I think a citation is in order on that one.
http://www.google.com
You're the one pushing the assertion, asshole. That means YOU post the link and citation.
Why are you demanding Jeffy smear his feces on his keyboard and monitor? That's totally inappropriate.
Yeah, I suspected you were lying, Lying Jeffy.
I definitely agree here. I have huge issues with this prosecution, and not least of them are Letitia James' campaign promise that Donald Trump was an illegitimate president (sounds kinda insurrection-y!) and that she was going to make him accountable, and he would know her name. Seems like she had personal animus and ran on a platform of targeting him, and here we have a case where there's no perceivable victim but she pushed this case.
Maybe because the theory of Trump's guilt was an 'unsettled legal question'.
When there's an unsettled legal question, as in a vague law, or a vagueness over whether a law applies in a certain case, courts are required to apply the rule of lenity. That is, it is weighted toward a defendant and not toward the state. So if this is truly an unsettled legal question, Trump should be considered innocent.
Radical Individualist for the presumption of guilty until proven innocent?
James is the kind of person that would sue a company because other people litter. She should be nowhere near the power an AG has.
NY standing has been made clear since last fall. All Trump and the boys had to do was play by the same rules as everyone else.
Again. They'll NY real estate scene all do the same. Why they are against this trial dummy.
Weak. Again.
Lol. Pathetic.
Stupid. Still.
Yeah they are playing by the same rules. The judge and prosecutor are changing the rules.
Despite brazenly lying on financial documents and inventing valuations seemingly out of thin air, Trump's lender did not testify that it would have valued his loans any differently.
Well at least we know where you're coming from, man.
What's the problem? Was it the use of the word 'brazenly'?
I mean, Trump did lie about the valuation of his property. Is that even in doubt?
Is it wrong to point that out?
It means that Lancaster has bought into a narrative.
For example, Trump listed Mar-a-Lago's value as high as $612 million, even though the Palm Beach County tax assessor listed its value between $18 million and $27.6 million.
The tax assessed value of a property is not what the property is worth. Nobody can buy an empty lot in the area of Mar-a-Lago for $30 million, much less one that has a lavish residence on it. That tax assessment is where the insane undervalue is. It only looks like brazen overvalue if you buy the tax assessment as the actual value of the property which many, many experts say is improper. In fact, the purchase price of the property actually much greater BECAUSE its tax assessment is so low-meaning it's more desirable to live there because the tax value is so much less than the relative value of the property.
So I didn't even have to read the article, just the subheading, to know that Lancaster was going to buy the extreme tax-assessed undervalue of his property.
No realtor ever has based a listing price on the assessors value. Sales prices ultimately drive assessments. Not the other way around.
Jeff might be shocked to learn seller's may even choose not to sell if not getting their minimum price.
Every person they buys art, or baseball cards, or anything above what a court says it is worth has been defrauded by this precedent.
"The bank came up with its own, much lower value estimates of Trump's properties using his financial statements as a starting point for its own credit-risk analysis."
And the bank's assessment were still ridiculously higher than the tax-assessed value. They disagreed with Trump's assessments but they gave him the loan anyway, and don't regret the rates.
Lancaster is not saying that he AGREES that Mar-a-Lago is worth $18-27.6 million. These are examples of Trump's dishonesty that were presented in the judgment. Is it "buying into a narrative" to report on what's in the judgment?
Instead, it would be "buying into a narrative" if he were to say "the judgment is full of shit and Trump is a victim", like so many people here are doing.
I can't read Lancaster's mind so I don't know what he really thinks about property valuations in south Florida, I can only go by what he wrote.
Is it “buying into a narrative” to report on what’s in the judgment?
Absolutely. If the judgment is based upon bullshit and you report it as written without calling out that it's bullshit, you're absolutely buying into the narrative.
That's literally the first example Lancaster went to support his assertion-HIS assertion-that Trump 'brazenly lied on financial assessments.' He clearly find those accurate enough to make that statement.
Do you understand that not everyone thinks the judgment is bullshit?
Also, which is better journalistic practice, in your view: to report on what’s in the judgment, or to tell readers YOUR OPINION about the judgment?
I find it disturbingly amusing that you seemingly believe that "the judgment is bullshit" is not really opinion, but some sort of objective fact.
Do you understand that not everyone thinks the judgment is bullshit?
Yes. The truth, however, is not based upon what many people happen to believe.
And if people believe that it's not bullshit, I would absolute describe that as "buying into a narrative," which is what I've accused Lancaster of, even though he's still got problems with the judgment. He's accepting the underlying facts which are completely bogus.
How is it bogus to accept facts?
And if people believe that it’s not bullshit, I would absolute describe that as “buying into a narrative,”
I see. So your opinion is the standard of truth, and everything else is "narrative".
When facts aren't facts. If I tell you that 2+2 =5, and you tell me no, that's wrong, are you suddenly denying facts?
The "facts" aren't factual.
I see. So your opinion is the standard of truth, and everything else is “narrative”.
Nope. Not how I play this. The truth is the truth. It's clearly the truth that tax assessments are not a reliable predictor of sale or purchase value of a property. This is demonstrably true, it has nothing to do with anyone's opinion; the actual value of property is what it's bought and sold for. There is a factual underpinning for this.
Therefore, anyone relying upon a tax assessment to declare that someone is misrepresenting the value of a property is definitionally engaging in bullshit.
Is this an attempt at a "gotcha?" I have to ask why you'd even ask that last question if it's not.
Irony is jeff tried pushing 2+2=5 here for an entire summer.
I think you have confused truth and opinion. "The ruling is bullshit" is an opinion, not truth.
When facts aren’t facts. If I tell you that 2+2 =5, and you tell me no, that’s wrong, are you suddenly denying facts?
What if I said 2 + 2 = 11? Is that wrong? (Yes this is a trick question.)
I think you have confused truth and opinion. “The ruling is bullshit” is an opinion, not truth.
The ruling is based upon an incorrect understanding of property valuations and the purpose of statements of financial condition in significant transactions. The judge doesn't understand the subject matter or the fact that the bank was not harmed because they upheld their own fiduciary responsibility. Disagreements about value are not fraud. I think my watch is worth $15, you think it's worth $5 dollars, but that isn't a misrepresentation or a false pretense to con you out of ten dollars.
Therefore, when I say the judgment is based upon bullshit, I'm pointing to the facts underpinning the ruling. There was no detrimental reliance upon the statements of financial condition by Deutsche Bank that led them to offer the loan. They made their own financial assessments.
Besides being a dishonest piece of shit, Lying Jeffy is ignorant as fuck.
""The ruling is based upon an incorrect understanding of property valuations ""
I don't think that's correct. The ruling wasn't based on any value. It was based on a misrepresentation of footage in the paperwork. That's what some people are failing to understand. The dollar amount isn't an issue. It's what he claimed to have in the paperwork.
It's more like I applied for a loan for some land I want to buy. I say the land is 100 acres in the application, but the land is really only 10 acres. That's the issue. However, if the bank doesn't care, and I pay the loan, there is no harm. No harm, no civil suit.
If both parties (bank, and Trump) are satisfied then I don't see why the AG needs to step in.
""It’s more like I applied for a loan for some land I want to buy. ""
Really meant
Say I applied for a loan using land I own for collateral..
"Do you understand that not everyone thinks the judgment is bullshit?"
You can find defenders of any terrible judicial decision. This means nothing.
There are people who think Kelo v New London was a good decision.
Read the ruling. There is a section devoted to MaL.
Jeff apparently believes that government should determine the value of property. How individualist.
not what I said, learn to read
Learn to think.
I would add that in Judge Engoron opinion he noted that complete lack of remorse by Donald, Don Jr. and Eric. This certainly cost them points.
A lack of remorse for getting and paying back a loan? Those villains!
I'm shocked, SHOCKED, to learn that mutually consensual financial transactions are taking place here.
So you haven't read the ruling I see.
I know that Deutsche bank testified for the defense.
The only other kind of cases where victims testify for the defense would be some statrape prosecutions, but at least the victim's consent is invalid as a matter of law.
Deutsch Bank is certainly capable of consent.
When you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar it is always good to look contrite.
So be obsequious to the state. Totally not preaching authoritarianism there.
Wow, people who did nothing wrong showing no remorse for things they didn't do. Shocking.
So you prescribe to the idea justice is about punishing people then? Okay, so you won't be speaking against the death penalty from here on our? Since justice is about punishing people.
Are you fucking parody? If so, you're bad parody.
Whatever you think of Trump, his companies have brought billions of dollars into the state of New York in the form of taxes, wages, interest payments etc. Whatever Trump's political future I would like to see him tell NY to fuck off and move his assets to a different state at his first opportunity.
Honestly, if I was a business in New York, I'd hightail it out of there as quickly and quietly as I could.
So, it's okay to use MAI appraisals (Made As Imagined) when you take out a loan as long as you pay it back. Is it not okay to do so if the loans go south and the lender needs to resort to the collateral for payment? There's something wrong besides Trump's overinflated ego and sense of self-worth. Yes, overzealous prosecutors, maybe, but isn't there just something illegal/improper/haram about doing this? NINJA loans, at least, were ludicrous on their face: No Income, No Job or Assets.
And it was a $125 million loan. It's not like Trump didn't have that in collateral if he put up his properties. The bank was more interested in easy collection so they asked him to maintain, IIC, $50 million in liquidity. As long as he maintained sufficient liquid assets they weren't terrible concerned about the security of the loan.
Hey dummy. The banks set the terms of the loan. If they want collateral it can be a term. They did their own valuation assessments. They testified in favor of Trump at trial dummy.
Banks have a fiduciary responsibility to do their due diligence. If I claim an income of 250k but my 1040 says 30k they must reject my application. Having said that, bankers will tell you that they assume successful self employed individuals actually have higher disposable income than may be reported on a 1040. And that doesn't imply tax fraud, only the ability to expense items that may be of personal benefit. I paid leases on business property and vehicles for decades to myself for property I owned as an S Corp. I paid income tax on the rent money but I didn't pay the additional 15.3% self employment tax. It's perfectly legal. The banks have formulas to figure out all of this shit. They don't just take your word for it. In the case of multi million dollar loans you can bet your ass they're looking at every angle and potential for default. That's what they do. We're currently witnessing the collapse of commercial property values in big cities across the nation. Many are in default. Does that mean the borrower inflated the value or that the lenders failed to do their due diligence? No. Everything is an educated guess. Always.
Yes, overzealous prosecutors, maybe, but isn’t there just something illegal/improper/haram about doing this? NINJA loans, at least, were ludicrous on their face: No Income, No Job or Assets.
Behold step two in the process:
1. It’s not a witch hunt.
2. Ok, it’s a witch hunt, but it’s not as bad as you say. — you are here
3. It’s a witch hunt, but it it’s a good thing because anything is justified in keeping Trump from the levers of power. Sam Harris is here
4. Shut up Racist. The Media is here
Get your facts straight Lancaster. Trump didn’t value the properties, it was done by third party professional accountants. The bank also used third party accountants. No one had a problem and there was no victim.
If these valuations were obviously wrong, then why weren’t the accountant firms charged as accessories to fraud?
No one else was ever dragged into civil courts like this. In case you’re a naive child, the New York court system consists of political hacks and has been that way for well over two hundred years.
Apparently, you have no problem with a prosecutor who ran for election on the platform that she would get Trump, no matter what. Quoting Beria "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime". Good thing for Trump that we don't have gulags, at least not yet.
Last, I utterly despise Trump, but if this kind of crap becomes standard for taking out political enemies, we are in for a long, hard ride.
Wrong. Trump IGNORED 3rd party appraisals.
Do you think Trump sits around writing up property appraisals? How about Bezos? Maybe Musk? What about Joe Biden? Have you ever actually read a property appraisal? I didn't think so.
Of course not. Trump hired appraisers and then ignored their appraisals because he is, according to the Judge, a fraudster. Love that word.
But the banks didn't and they gave the loan based on their appraisal. Disagreeing with an appraisal is not fraud, especially as his disagreement didn't impact the awarding of the loan. You admitting you love the word fraudster shows you aren't concerned about the tightness or legality of this ruling, but only care about taking down someone you obviously dislike. I never voted for Trump and consider this a travesty of justice as it sete an exceedingly dangerous precedent as I have this little thing called integrity.
Disagreeing with YOUR HALF of the appraisal that the other half agreed with isn't not just fraud, it's fucking capitalism.
"...a fraudster. Love that word..."
TDS-addled pile of shit. Love that very honest and descriptive phrase.
Make your family proud; fuck off and die.
The banks do their own appraisals. Learn how loans are made, dipshit.
I spent eleven years in the mortgage industry.
I would have been astonished if Deutsche Bank simply took Trump's word for the valuation of a multi-million dollar property.
they testified that they did not.
The lending institutions are supposed to have their own appraisers. It's standard practice. Have you ever bought a house? You don't waltz in and ask for $500,000 and they just give it to you. Besides, I can hire 3 appraisers and get 3 different evaluations of a property depending on what comparable properties they use. Happens all the time. If I ignore them and ask the bank for something off the wall the bank will ignore me and should. Believe me, it's the banks fault for lending excess funds if they get burned. If they didn't and don't complain then there is no victim. James should not be persecuting Trump for anything. Her problem should be with the banks for their lending practices. I'm sure she knows much more about commercial real estate than Deutsche Bank with over 1,400 world wide branches and a loan portfolio of approximately $1 Trillion.
The accountant firm later claimed that they did not perform independent evaluations but merely accepted Trump's numbers. Did they commit fraud? If so, against whom? Trump? Deutscher Bank? State of New York? The "Common Good"? Area 51?
This firm suddenly dropped all connections with Trump around the time that James was elected. I wonder why?
If that were the case, then Trump should sue those accountants.
But I wonder how hard it is to look at the assed tax valuations, rather than pull out a gigantic and erroneous figure out from thin air.
The US does have gulags
So why do so many people here think Trump is more trustworthy than he really is?
I mean, sure, Letitia James certainly has darker motives here than "seeking justice for justice's sake". But why can't the same be said about Trump, when he was doing his property valuations? Like when he purposefully misstated the square footage of his penthouse apartment?
Why is so hard for so many people here to even admit that Trump may not be totally honest? If you do that, it doesn't mean that you automatically become a Letitia James fanboi or a Biden voter. It makes you more of a rational human being rather than a Trump cultist or a Trump-cultist-adjacent at least.
No one was defrauded. Trump made his valuation, and the banks made their own. If you think rich people don't overvalue their assets, there are bridges to be sold.
Trump is a private citizen. Letitia James is a government prosecutor who boasted about "going after Trump". If the government tries to slap a 20 year sentence on a guy for stealing a sneakers bar, my takeaway isn't "that kid has a history of lying"
What does your cost benefit analysis? Should the NY government go after every billionaire for what Trump did?
"Should the NY government go after every billionaire for what Trump did?"
Well if they start with Soros. Just kidding.
Exactly. Trump came up with valuations, the bank came up with theirs and there was a negotiated price both where happy with. The loan was made and paid back. Some of the people arguing on here have no idea how real estate, especially commercial real estate works and how fuzzy the numbers can get.
"Some of the people arguing on here have no idea how real estate, especially commercial real estate works and how fuzzy the numbers can get."
Leticia James was counting on this.
I think everyone already knows that in business, Trump does whatever he can get away with and uses exaggeration and hyperbole frequently in negotiations (I'm not one to claim Trump is some genius negotiator, but his style is well known). Of course he's not totally honest. That doesn't mean the state of NY has any basis to sue him in civil court when no one he was doing business with is complaining.
In politics, also, Trump lies and exaggerates. He's a bloviator. A bag of air. I strongly dislike this aspect of him.
Not an issue when there's no crime and no victim.
Let me ask you this Jeff, what of any of this was the government's business? Trump submitted a valuation for a loan, the bank responded with a different evaluation, but still gave him the loan? Trump accepted the terms of the loan and paid them back. It was a consensual exchange that harmed no one!
Isn't that the free market you claim you believe in? You scream and holler about government restricting illegal immigration but are fine with it butting into a private transaction where neither party was complaining? Fuck off!
Well said. The contortions used to promote Trump astounds me. I love the section in the ruling where Judge Engoron refers to Trump's previous fraudulent activities.
You love? This shows you don't care about anything but getting Trump, ergo you lack integrity and it's all about punishing people you dislike. Thanks for admitting this, now we can all dismiss you as the obvious partisan hack you are. Fully supportive using laws in new ways to punish people you dislike. In other words, an authoritarian, which I'm sure you accuse everyone else as being who disagrees with you, while avoiding looking at yourself in the mirror. Hint: if you use tyranny to combat perceived tyranny, that makes you the tyrant, not the other guy.
This pile of shit has shown nothing other than a raging case of TDS. Honesty or integrity should not be mentioned in the same sentence as slimyrick.
You think that was well said?
Hahahahahahahaha
So why do so many people here think Trump is more trustworthy than he really is?
Judging by the mendacity of his chief defenders, I think they admire the fact that he's an untrustworthy liar.
Why is so hard for so many people here to even admit that Trump may not be totally honest?
As Michael Malice said about RFK when talking about him in his podcast, he suggested that RFK was a sociopath. He then followed that up by saying, "I don't believe sociopathy is a disqualifier for someone running for president, because I believe that a certain amount of sociopathy is required for the job"
Who here has ever said Trump is "totally honest". Biden, whatever one thinks of him, is a confirmed, documented and established congenital liar. Not just about the politics surrounding his current white house position, but in all areas of both public and private life. Yet 81 million adults in the room voted for him.
And don't hit me with that "well, it was a vote against Trump, not FOR Biden". The Democrats as a political body had AMPLE opportunity to put a different candidate across the line during the 2020 primary-- candidates I might have voted for in the general, but they couldn't even do that.
It makes for a fun election when one candidate has the lowest approval rating in history and his opponent is essentially in a statistical dead-heat with him.
I mean, sure, Letitia James certainly has darker motives here than “seeking justice for justice’s sake”. But why can’t the same be said about Trump, when he was doing his property valuations?
Letitia James is wielding the power of the state to attack a political opponent. Trump is, and was during the entirety of the actions of the case, a private citizen. She’s the one wielding the power of the state to deprive the rights of an individual.
I wonder why libertarians are more sympathetic to Trump in this case.
EDIT: This should have been a reply to chemjeff above.
It's revealing watching our institutions take their revenge over Trump threatening them, and of course the fake libertarians cheering them on.
This entire article
"How can I make a case that involved literally no victim still appear as if Trump is the criminal"
Good summation.
For a magazine with a sub line about free markets, they sure defend the government here.
At least he acknowledges, at the end, that nobody was harmed, so this whole thing seems points.
Nobody was harmed and yet the penalty is $364 MILLION. That's just insane. If they'd resolved that he made a misrepresentation and fined him $1,000, this wouldn't be such an issue (though it still might set a dangerous precedent for smaller business owners).
According to NY law harm was done hence the $$$ disgorgement penalty.
There's no victim. There can be no harm. Deutsche Bank complete their own independent valuations and agreed to give Donald Trump the loan. They were paid back. They made money, he made money.
Read the law. I don't know if I approve of the law or not but it is the law. I've been a businessman and an investor and I am not fond of fraudsters. Apparently NY frowns on them as well. Trump has been judged to be one. And not for the first time.
Fraud requires specific intent to create a material misstatement that is relied upon. Offering subjective valuations that are disputed means there can be no detrimental reliance. He made those in the process of negotiating a loan, in an instance where the other party made their own independent valuations and relied upon those, and then agreed to the loan and the terms.
Not every inaccuracy is a fraud. It still requires some element of criminal intent to be a fraud, and done in a way that is detrimental. If I tell you the moon is made of cheese, I am not defrauding you.
New York law appears to be based on the idea that an action that harms no one can still be a "crime against the state". It's in a class with "hate speech" and private gun ownership.
Feeling afraid of certain words or concealed carry permits is not a violation of rights. If it were, then every dog owner who walked his dog past someone with a pathological fear of dogs could be arrested. Fear of words or nonthreatening people with guns is pathological as opposed to someone screaming "I'm going to kill you" or waving a gun in your face. Those fears are not pathological. Nor are the fears of Jewish students in a library hearing an angry mob calling for the mass murder of the fellow Jews.
So as a businessman, how many potential acquisitions have to taken to court for overvaluing their own businesses? Ugh, even writing that gives me the creeps.
Value is subjective. I value things differently from you. If you rely on what I say the value is, then that's on you, it's not me committing fraud.
Trump accepted the terms of the loan, and thus acquiesced to Deutsch Bank's valuation.
"Read the law..."
Fuck off and die, slimyrick
"Read the law. I don’t know if I approve of the law or not but it is the law. I’ve been a businessman and an investor and I am not fond of fraudsters. Apparently NY frowns on them as well. Trump has been judged to be one. And not for the first time."
I'm a businessman and an investor and I despise ignorant, lying steaming piles of shit like you.
Which is why banks testified they weren't harmed. But big daddy government says they were! How dare they disagree.
So both parties made money, both did their own appraisals, the lender based the loan on their appraisal not the lendees appraisal. No one claims harm but New York laws says no harm needs to be actually incurred to punish the lendee for something the lender didn't even consider in their decision to lend? And that's your defense of an outrageously high damages (larger than the original loan by a factor of 300%) and defense of bringing the charges in the first place by someone who stated in their election that their aim was to get the defendant no matter what? And you come to a place where most of us believe victimless crimes are bullshit and try to convince us the law is good because... Why?
So is that money going to the backs? You know, the alleged victims?
*banks*
Yes, it's going to the blacks. To pay for part of the reparations bill that will get passed shortly.
*just joking
Here is the summation. We don't agree with the judge's ruling and find his rulings inconsistent and biased. Your rejoinder is 'the judge said'. We say this is a unique and never before applied interpretation of the rule. Your rejoinder? The law says. We say no the law didn't say that before the judge decided it did. Your rejoinder? Read the judgement? Which was biased. Finally after arguing in circles with you, you finally admit that what you love is now being able to call Trump a fraudster. Note it's all about you hating Trump not how dangerous this precedence is or how it completely disregards juris prudence and how the judge made his ruling before even allowing Trump's lawyers to present their case. It's all about smearing Trump. Which makes you the real danger to America. Twisting the law to get people you don't like and punish them at 300% greater than any possible actual damage so you can ruin them. That is the real threat destroying equal protection under the law to punish people for disagreeing with your politics.
Twisting the law to get people you don’t like and punish them at 300% greater than any possible actual damage so you can ruin them
I mean, there was no damage, but that is worth pointing out. The penalty is $364 million, when the act in question is a $125 million loan. It's still insane that they can just seize this for basically no reason with no victim.
I somehow missed that part. I also don't see who is bringing the case. If this is a civil trial then shouldn't it be a private entity filing for damages? No part of this makes sense for the anti-Trump people and I don't know what to do about our judiciary becoming so out of control and biased.
Alex Jones owing 3 billion dollars because he doubted some details from a school shooting. Trump owes millions to a woman for defamation for denying having raped her despite absolutely zero evidence that the supposed encounter could even plausibly occur.
There have been too many judgements lately that don't evaluate any facts in an impartial manner. These also seem to extract the harshest penalties in the process. We live in a banana republic. I don't even like Trump, but this shit is a sign that the establishment needs to be overthrown by any means necessary
""Nobody was harmed and yet the penalty is $364 MILLION. That’s just insane. ""
These kinds of civil awards are often reduced after appeal.
But watch, when it happens how many people will go after the judge.
There is literally no victim only because the bank knew Trump was lying to them.
It's hard to look at this objectively because Trump is so polarizing, but do you honestly think it's a good thing for someone to lie about their assets when they are trying to get a loan? It might not be criminal, but it's clearly shady because it means you probably are aiming at lower interest rates
God damn you socialists are retarded. When you buy a house and negotiate to a lower sale price, was the real estate agent lying to you and committing fraud?
Just look at all the money to be made: the RE company, seller, appraisers all conspired to commit fraud in every case where the sale price was in excess of the tax assessors valuation from whenever ago. That is a whole lot of money to be made by suing those fraudsters not only in RE but literally any transaction where a profit is made.
"It’s hard to look at this objectively because Trump is so polarizing..."
How long have you been suffering from TDS, steaming pile of shit?
In point of fact no living breathing human being knows the value of any of Trump's properties. An arm's length consummated sales contract is the only way to establish it.
Absolutely correct. But the evaluations were not for sale but for loans and in these cases estimates are all you have to work with. Estimates are not perfect and people should expect this. The Trump families problem was in exceeding the expected errors for the estimates.
Apparently the banks don't agree that there were excessive errors. And considering the fact that the Trump organization always paid off their loans hard to see the relevance.
Trump organization has not always paid off their loans. They have a record of bankruptcies, six in total, and as well as defaults.
https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/new-york-times-report-president-trump-got-much-of-his-debt-forgiven-after-defaulting-on-loans-for-chicago-trump-tower/
So had any of the loans in the NY case been a problem Trump likely would have defaulted again. Getting lucky and not defaulting doesn't wipe away the fact.
And the banks chose to take that gamble. If Trump had defaulted, there still would have been no victim. There is no law that guarantees banks a return on risky investments.
I didn't read the article, but if you are saying that someone getting a debt forgiven is considered not paying off their loan and is bad then I'm curious about your position on student loans.
btw, the bank testified Trump was a star customer and appreciated his business.
If I were a major stockholder in any of these banks, I would be questioning the leadership of the bank right now. Everything worked out but if Trump had defaulted, and he has in the past, the banks could have been looking at a big loses. That doesn't count the lost profit by giving loans out at rates lower than was appropriate. I am not a socialist and I expect companies I own to make a profit for me.
They did their own due diligence. They disagreed with Trump's value assessments and listed several properties as substantially lower than Trump listed them. They approved the loan anyway because it was considered a good investment.
And also a good business decision, since Trump would undoubtedly be back to borrow more money from them later.
And Trump, despite the bank replying on an appraisal which valued his property less than he liked, agreed to the loan anyway.
My plane landed safely, but if a meteor were to hit it befor landing, then I would have been in real trouble
""but if Trump had defaulted,""
It's as if you don't understand the loan business. It's a risk business. The "but if" is considered before they approve. If it would have been a loser, they would have treated it like all the losers they deal with.
People who always look at the negative will rarely get ahead. You wouldn't have given Trump the loan, Deutsche bank did and received a lot of money from interest.
So, if I understand the appeal process correctly the fine has to be paid now and you don't get it back unless you win on appeal. As the RNC has been paying much of Trump's legal bills will they also be paying the fine? With Trump wanting family running the RNC the organization will be just a subsidiary of the Trump company anyway, so it seems they could cover the fine.
Lol. So you believe in temporary harm as a benefit even if thrown on appeal. Fucking statist.
Process is the punishment, loved by authoritarians everywhere.
I don't believe it will be thrown out on appeal.
Lol. So what harm is the prosecution rectifying. Or are you now supporting prosecution as a punishment?
The fine has to be paid to whom? That's not clear.
What usually happens is that to appeal, he would need to put up the amount in escrow pending the outcome of the appeal.
The penalty is paid to the State of New York. Whether paid to the State or escrowed the company will have to come up with the money.
So he committed fraud, but there is no injured party because the bank knew he was committing fraud and used their own valuation of his assets?
If the government really wanted to go after him, they would try to have him pay taxes on the values of his property based on his own estimates, not reality.
"So he committed fraud, but there is no injured party because the bank knew he was committing fraud and used their own valuation of his assets?"
No, imbecile, there was no fraud.
Don't the people lending the money have sort of a fiduciary duty to appraise any properties listed as collateral? Were the loans repaid?
Yes, and yes.
But TRUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Where is the breach of contract?
Trump never defaulted on the loans, and no one from Deutsche Bank, his principal lender, testified that they would have priced the loans any differently had they known of the alleged inaccuracies. The bank came up with its own, much lower value estimates of Trump's properties using his financial statements as a starting point for its own credit-risk analysis.
Is this an example of the Trump effect?
https://twitter.com/Pro__Trading/status/1758281676785164388
BREAKING: The SEC has approved the merger of $DWAC and Truth Social. President Trump is expected to profit almost 4 BILLION dollars given his 58% stake in the company and the current stock price.
This ruling carried to any logical conclusion is a complete dismantlement of capitalism and free markets but Lancaster is too stupid to understand that or worse, he does understand and is still cheering.
I think Joe has proven that he’s just stupid.
"...but Lancaster is too stupid..."
By miles.
Joe, please show some integrity; fuck off and die.
If such and arbitrary ruling based on nothing but political views is allowed to stand then NY is about to see an exodus of large financial firms accelerate over the what is happening now. Who want's to get on the wrong side of the political elite in NY and be a target like this.
"The bank came up with its own, much lower value estimates of Trump's properties using his financial statements as a starting point for its own credit-risk analysis." Trump's lawyers argued that "lenders made a profit and never alleged any breach of contract."
Right there, there was no victim.
Key question left out of all this reporting. So Trump is ordered to pay $364 million, to WHOM exactly?
With no victim, there's no one to pay restitution to. To the state? So judge Erdogon and Letitia James can both buy private jets?
Interesting question. If I was running one of the "victim " banks , I would certainly be in court in front of the judge with my hand out. /s
"But Engoron noted in his September ruling that the units are rent stabilized; taking this into account, the actual appraised value of the apartments is $62,500 per unit."
How is it that the Judge who has never worked in the financial industry , is a sharper appraiser than the banks who lent Trump the money? How unfortunate that the Judge was not in charge of the bank and other financial institutions who were making NINJA loans on real estate prior to the financial crisis of 2007 - 2008.
If we took the position that all crimes must have a defined victim with a loss, then we would eliminate all drug and immigration laws.
then we would eliminate all drug and immigration laws.
Agree with the first and that sounds fabulous. As for the second, there is only a victim when we combine it with social benefits such as free healthcare, free education, etc that is being funded by taxpayers but given out to people who haven't contributed anything to the system. If we eliminate all entitlements, then I agree on the second as well and that also sound fabulous.
You think you scored a point on a libertarian leaning website by bringing up drug legalization? Really? Hint, moron, the majority of us who post don't believe in victimless crimes. Can't produce a victim there is no crime. I support drug legalization. I support legalizing prostitution and gambling. Not open borders because there are plenty of victims from it, starting with a lot of the illegal immigrants and extending to just about everyone else. The idea that illegal immigration is victimless is pure bullshit. And yes, European immigrants that came to the Americas from 1492 on did create victims. A bit too late to correct that (and impossible to stop it since humans always migrate and someone always ends up a victim of that migration, ask the Roma-Gauls of France and Britain how well they did as a result of the German Migration Period). I'm betting the Mayans, Inca and Aztec probably wish they had better border control, then again their victims (as they themselves were also colonizers too) probably feel the same way about them.
Jews should sue Egypt for reparations owing from Jews being slaves in ancient Egypt.
Man, wouldn’t it awesome if we could all sue the feds for $364 Million each on the basis that they cannot produce an auditable accounting of how our taxes were spent?
Sue the Pentagon for $300 million for their fraudulent statements in every attempted audit.
yes!
I don't like Trump even a little, but this is a witch hunt
Precisely.
My position on him hasn't changed one iota in almost a decade. I will never support his candidacy for office. I will, however, defend him against the utter garbage the left does to him.
What's truly mindblowing is how the Democrats and their Media Industrial Complex can't see how counterproductive this is. It only makes his supporters even more loyal, it drives rational people in the center in his direction, and it makes it plainly obvious to anyone with their eyes open how deep the corruption is. But then, it's probably the only hand they can play - because there's no way of defending their glitching Biden robot on literally any subject.
Trump's attackers don't realize the damage they are doing to the legal system and the major media. If people lose trust in the law, they will start taking the law into their own hands. But how can we trust the law if it is being used as a weapon?
Yes, indeed. The sheer amount of use of "two-tiered justice" in our everyday conversation these days is likely indicative that said trust is already gone.
And garbage like this isn't the only offender. The ACAB morons and the Court of Public Opinion are also to blame for that.
And what they can do to Trump, they can do to you and me. And they will, once you anger someone holding power.
Nope, there’s only two allowed positions: either you agree with all of these lawsuits because Trump is the most Hitlery person since Hitler. The second you think these might be, maybe a little politically motivated you’re a Trump cultist who thinks he’s incapable of doing wrong.
So sayeth the true libertarians (tm)!
Sure appears to be. He has been doing business in NYC for decades and suddenly it's a problem?
Value is subjective.
The case was bullshit from the get-go. There are no victims to bring a complaint in the first place. Trump stated his OPINION of the value of the properties in question, which the lenders didn't take at face value.
They got their own appraisals and made their decisions accordingly. Trump did not default on the loans. The lenders made as much as they expected to from the transactions.
This was an Alvin Bragg witch-hunt, enabled by a judge who had a legal and moral duty to recuse himself.
-jcr
I agree. I wish for very bad things to happen to NY state.
I wonder if DJT would have run for president in 2016 if he had known defeating Hillary Clinton would cost this much? If he had simply assaulted and robbed her in New York it would have only been a slap on the wrist.
Here an interest twist on your idea. Had Donald Trump not run for President he would not have an image to protect. He likely would have settled any number of cases quietly. Paid a fine or settlement. And because he did fight it the settlement, he gave up would have been less than the penalty. There is a reality that fame has both and up and a downside. That is why there are any number of powerful people who chose to keep a low profile and exercise power without calling attention to themselves.
Time for me to contradict the narrative and say what I really think before being called a liar.
Do I think he overvalued his properties? Hell yeah!
Do I think this judgement is absurd? Double-plus hell yeah!
After thinking about it, I don't think this lawsuit should have existed in the first place being that it was initiated by the state, not his "victims."
Despite brazenly lying on financial documents and inventing valuations seemingly out of thin air, Trump's lender did not testify that it would have valued his loans any differently.
Huh?
There must be someone on the Reason staff not a shit-pile suffering from a raging case of TDS, but it's not obvious.
no one from Deutsche Bank, his principal lender, testified that they would have priced the loans any differently had they known of the alleged inaccuracies," Gershman wrote.
Huh?
Trump’s lender did not testify that it was a dirty rotten doody, either.
Trump Brazenly lied, but the victims testified that he didn't brazenly lie...
So I was at the mall today and I heard some stranger bragging to his friend about his million dollar house. Being like the Nazi-Officer Letitia James and Arthur Engoron is it was obviously my duty as a sworn Nazi-fan to investigate a conversation I had ZERO interest in and found out the stranger was a Jew! So of course I ordered that stranger having a conversation with someone else to pay $364 Million (to who is the question) since the other stranger said he really didn't care his friend was bragging.
Do people realize just how Nazi the left has gotten?
Not being a Nazi is white supremacy.
Well, that lets me off the hook!
Next time NYC faces bankruptcy, the feds should let it go bankrupt. I don't want my tax dollars bailing out that city. Let the city and the state suffer the consequences of their actions.
Fortunately, $364 million will now go to compensate Trump's victims for all the money they lost because of his fraud, right? Right?
I pictured this in the Anakin/Padme meme.
The most likely scenario is the money going to the Biden campaign.
Right. According to James DB is the victim here so Deutsche Bank is going to get the money. Isn't that how it works?
Today's Trump/Biden articles from my local daily:
Trump:
Biden:
Despite brazenly lying on financial documents and inventing valuations seemingly out of thin air
Property valuations are notoriously subjective -- a property is, ultimately, worth whatever you can get for it, which can change literally day to day.
The fact that neither the borrower nor lender objected to the valuations they agreed upon means the government should have absolutely no business stepping in. The banks Trump dealt with aren't innocent babes in the woods. They know how to assess risk and value. They did fine.
This is a blatantly political prosecution.
BLM prosecutor convicted of fraud and perjury.
Lawfare. This will destroy public trust in the law. The consequences will be ineffably bad. A lot of businesses and organizations will need to leave New York. The citizens will suffer the consequences for what their political leaders are doing.
> This will destroy public trust in the law.
Gonna be that guy: Feature, not a bug.
I'm more and more convinced, seeing how certain organizations that astroturf social media as well as traditional media are willing to tear down the Supreme Court, cast aspersions at individual justices, to destroy its legitimacy. How others were able to pit people against people during the pandemic -- everything from Fauci down to "your mask protects me" -- which very obviously destroyed public trust and social cohesion. How marxism has been promoted under the guise of "anti racism" or CRT or whatever. The list seems endless the last decade.
Yup. Powerful forces actually want to destroy American's trust.
I am an old man in chronic pain. I will have to work until I die and I want our country to continue to thrive because I could not survive if we suffer a national collapse.
But I fear we will have a national collapse. Dems and liberals are shredding legal protections to go after a politician that they hate. The country can survive a bad president. The country cannot survive if our system of legal protections are destroyed.
If this country does collapse, I just hope that I live long enough to see the fools responsible for this collapse get their just desserts. I just pray that their demises are more painful than mine will be.
How about this, I pray that the New York City real estate market crashes and that all property values drop to their tax assessed values.
As an old fart, it's hard to believe that the judicial branch could be weaponized to this extent. But it has.
Yes, I am willing to take up arms against the deep-state so broken by Trump, and I doubt I'm alone.
VALUE IS SUBJECTIVE!