Democrats Lawfare is American Fascism.

Fact of the matter is that if this non-crime was committed by any other person on the planet it would’ve never seen the light of day. The one and only reason charges were brought is to influence an election. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Lol. If you say so...

So you contend that if Trump wasn’t previously president and currently running for president that he’d still be being prosecuted for a financial crime where no party even lodged a complaint. If you believe that you’re crazy.

If Trump had not tried to offer his VP as human sacrifice in the name of anointing himself King of America he would not be the target of nearly so much litigation. Facts.

Had it been Obama before him attempting the same shit Proud Boys and Oath Keepers would have went David Koresh shit they nearly pulled that off as it was.

But then again Jan 6 were non-crimes not committed by right wingers if we drink the Trump-aid.

Fact is some of the charges are going to stick because Donald crossed some lines. Much of it is bullshit but this effort to try and pretend he didn't bring a bunch of it on himself is comical.

The shitstorm a Republican regime would reign down upon the Democrats had the 'steal' been on the other side would easily be just as fierce.

Fact is some of the charges are going to stick because Donald crossed some lines. Much of it is bullshit but this effort to try and pretend he didn't bring a bunch of it on himself is comical. Originally Posted by DNinja69

Yep. He brought everything on himself - ergo, he deserves everything he's getting.

First and foremost, he definitely broke many laws. Any argument to the contrary is ignorant, at best. He's been indicted on 91 felony counts. Nobody in that situation can possibly be innocent of all 91 counts. He's a criminal, full stop.

Secondly, he's a cocky, entitled asshole about being a criminal. He constantly tries to play the victim and shift blame away from his own criminal behavior.

Well, the bad news for donnie is... you don't get to just continually be a lawless asshole, and flaunt it, without it eventually coming back to kick you in the balls. I would advise donnie to get ready to be kicked in the balls again and again, for years to come.

disgorgement is real, and despite the claims on no victims no crime. The law books at Cornell say differently.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/disg...0unprofitable.

I've also mentioned the valuations of loans being subjective to market interpretation of the underwriting criteria when done. I'm fairly certain that no bank wants to be known as "loose with its money", and won't complain about it, ESPECIALLY if they believed any of Donald's fake accounting values. That would just damage them financially further, and make them subject to regulators reviews, and even shareholder lawsuits. Imagine if you bought Deutsche bank and lost money due to poor performance and it came out that loans were poorly investigated!? Holy shit show- mr. Class action lawsuits, here I come!

It also makes those loans subject to the "cockroach theory", and thus less valued. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cockroach-theory.asp#:~:text=The%20cockr oach%20theory%20is%20a,can't%2 0see%20right%20away.

His company is well known for being a Piker's pit, and where only shit-healed nobodies go to work. Hence all his washed up attorneys, fired, or found out as frauds and admonished in some cases, disbarred in others; his lead accountant who went to jail, all and the fines he's facing. Even his fucking butler and pool attendant are dirty no good fucks.

Do the crimes- face the judge and get the fines.

Trump is only on a faster track than he would have been. He was heading down this road right after Jan 6th, and for all the stupidity he's been pulling. I'll be glad to see him disgorged right into a net value of zero. He didn't pay what he should have for 50 plus years of hiding inheritances, taxes, bankruptcies and his affairs. He's reaping what he sowed for half a century.

They gave him a rate because he’s Donald Trump and they wanted his business. I do the same thing all the time. It’s none of the government’s business and certainly not wrongdoing by the client.

They gave him a rate because he’s Donald Trump and they wanted his business. I do the same thing all the time. It’s none of the government’s business and certainly not wrongdoing by the client. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

LOL. unless your a bank subject to federal regulations and fair credit and lending practices. But yeah...none of anyones business till the business goes belly up.

How many times has Trumps' businesses done that to date? 7!

His loans were considered JUNK rated prior. BBB-

Why are banks federally regulated?

What about banks selling his loans under assignment ornovation? They might get less than 100% if the loan was underwritten with fraudulent information, or not be able to sell it at all on the secondary market. Does that sound good for a bank that wants to initiate more loans but needs to free up capital on hand. Kinda ties their hands to a shitty fraudster doesn't it??

Wanting business is great. It's more than fine. But lending to a liar, sets you up for a problem if the loans are based on fraudulent numbers or false information such as collateral values, or leased space % etc. Such as all the shit Diaper Donnie loaded up on his books as being more than were really worth. That's a big banking no-no.

Except none of that happened in this case, your hypothetical’s notwithstanding. All parties were fine with the transactions and willing to do it again.

I'm fairly certain that no bank wants to be known as "loose with its money", and won't complain about it, ESPECIALLY if they believed any of Donald's fake accounting values. That would just damage them financially further, and make them subject to regulators reviews, and even shareholder lawsuits. Imagine if you bought Deutsche bank and lost money due to poor performance and it came out that loans were poorly investigated!? Holy shit show- mr. Class action lawsuits, here I come! Originally Posted by eyecu2

There you go again... "Imagine if..." all you do is speculate wildly and baselessly, driven by your trump hatred. You said you worked in banking on the investment side (not the lending side). Did you not do your homework before you bought shares in Deutsche Bank or any other company? Was evaluating the bank's lending standards, loan performance and charge-off history not part of doing your homework? You are delusional if you think every time a bank or a public company stumbles, its shareholders can file a class-action lawsuit. Investing in stocks is always risky - didn't you learn that? Caveat emptor.

Try this one on for size, eye - if Deutsche Bank was truly defrauded, why haven't its management and/or its shareholders sued the Trump Organization? Why aren't they now suing AG Tish James and demanding that she fork over all of the so-called "ill-gotten gains" to the actual party she argued was defrauded - i.e., Deutsche Bank? Why are they letting the bitch keep all the money for herself?

One more thing - you refer to "Donald's fake accounting values". Valuations of real estate and other assets are not "accounting values". They are estimates of current Fair Market Value (FMV). As such, they are subject to substantial variations, depending on the assumptions and/or methodologies employed. Financial statements contain "accounting values". Appraisals and valuations don't.

The old 'it ain't wrong because Trump done it' argument.

The bank in question is not privately owned and while I would not expect many within the power structure there to admit it this has not been a process without some collateral damage internally. The notion of 'no victim' where hundreds of millions in excess gains were skimmed by fudging some numbers is an argument of convenience since the facts clearly indicate laws were broken.

I have no issue with anyone wanting to vastly reduce the payback or heralding that bank execs were more than willing to play the game as they do with high rollers on a regular basis. But if we can't be honest about the facts involved it becomes fraud to enable fraud.

Trump has filed the appeal. Now we wait to see what the outcome will be.

One big point of contention with the appeal involves whether the judge:

"committed errors of law and/or fact"

Laws. and Facts.

trump has filed the appeal. Now we wait to see what the outcome will be.

One big point of contention with the appeal involves whether the judge:

"committed errors of law and/or fact"

Laws. and Facts. Originally Posted by DNinja69

Hahaha...laws and facts... any time that's the bar that trump needs to clear, homeboy is fucked. Any time. Every time. His entire existence is built upon people believing his bullshit.

DNinja69 - I give you credit for doing some homework and looking up what Deutsche Bank testified to at trial. Unfortunately I don't think you are interpreting it correctly. Like eye, you still seem emotionally glued to the idea that - "dammit, trump lied and this is our chance to ruin him!"

Here's what you quoted the Deutsche Bank executive as saying at trial:

"In 2019, for example, Trump’s financial statement listed his net worth at $5.8 billion, which the bank adjusted down to $2.5 billion." Originally Posted by DNinja69

The bank took Trump's numbers and gave them a 57% haircut! What does that tell you?

I can think of plenty of reasons they knocked down the numbers, and not just because Trump inflated them. As our friend Kevin O'Leary (aka Mr. Wonderful) noted, “Every single real estate developer everywhere on earth does this! The bank ALWAYS negotiates with you. Everybody understands how this works... this is a joke!”

If you read Judge Kangaroo's opinion, he claims the bank "relied" on the allegedly inflated Statement of Financial Condition (SFC) in crafting the loan terms it offered Trump. Yeah, they relied on the SFC to list and identify all of the Trump Organization's major assets & liabilities. They clearly DIDN'T rely on it for the valuations they assigned internally to said assets & liabilities.

Your claim that "hundreds of millions in excess gains were skimmed by fudging some numbers" is complete bullshit. You already showed us that Deutsche Bank knocked down the numbers by a whopping 57%. There was ZERO evidence presented at trial that Deutsche Bank would have charged a higher interest rate or otherwise tightened its loan terms if the SFCs had not been arguably inflated.

When they approve loans, banks look at various sources of repayment. Cashflow from operations is always the primary source, followed by secondary and tertiary repayment sources. SFC assets are usually regarded as a 3rd or 4th potential source of repayment. No prudent lender approves or prices a loan based on the value of the assets listed on a guarantor's SFC. They're largely immaterial. Why? Because the last thing a lender wants to do is take possession of a borrower's assets and go through the time-consuming headache of selling them (usually in a down market) in order to recoup a loan. If you have any banker friends, ask them and they will confirm everything I just wrote.

Where in anything I have said did you get the idea I am out to get Trump? My sense of Justice exists regardless of who is involved. I am not at any loss to understand how business gets done nor do I struggle to understand the difference between talking to a banker vs submitting documentation.

If you think my number are bullshit then tell me an accurate figure. How much did Trump benefit by submitting inflated numbers in order to secure lower rates and fees? The answer isn't zero and if you believe that it is then that is an issue I can't help you figure out.

As part of the agreement Trump had to maintain a net worth of $2.5b which I believe is still inflated vs truth but that is not relevant what is are the stipulations included so any claim that his terms were not on some level based on those figures would incorrect.

We can play ring around the Rosie all day on why the charges were pursued and whether its political my comments have been clear and consistent on those issues but once we get into court the discussion becomes a legal one. Currently the case in on appeal so we shall see how that goes. Trump made his own bed in the days before and years after Jan 6 so he invited the shitstorm

There you go again... "Imagine if..." all you do is speculate wildly and baselessly, driven by your trump hatred. You said you worked in banking on the investment side (not the lending side). Did you not do your homework before you bought shares in Deutsche Bank or any other company? Was evaluating the bank's lending standards, loan performance and charge-off history not part of doing your homework? You are delusional if you think every time a bank or a public company stumbles, its shareholders can file a class-action lawsuit. Investing in stocks is always risky - didn't you learn that? Caveat emptor.

Try this one on for size, eye - if Deutsche Bank was truly defrauded, why haven't its management and/or its shareholders sued the Trump Organization? Why aren't they now suing AG Tish James and demanding that she fork over all of the so-called "ill-gotten gains" to the actual party she argued was defrauded - i.e., Deutsche Bank? Why are they letting the bitch keep all the money for herself?

One more thing - you refer to "Donald's fake accounting values". Valuations of real estate and other assets are not "accounting values". They are estimates of current Fair Market Value (FMV). As such, they are subject to substantial variations, depending on the assumptions and/or methodologies employed. Financial statements contain "accounting values". Appraisals and valuations don't. Originally Posted by lustylad

Very well said. Especially the last paragraph. People really need to learn the difference between these items

It seems notable that more than half the country believe the legal system is being weaponized to take out a political opponent.

https://twitter.com/a_newsman/status...m1qompoNA&s=19