Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

Forest Bueller said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

Sorry, but the review is not abuse of discretion. Rather it is sufficiency of the evidence - something that is sorely lacking in this case as there is no evidence of a victim.

---

Haven't followed it closely, but I'm pretty sure no victim is required. I agree with Frank Galvin that the judgment looks excessive, at least at first glance.

---

So say I value a $350,000 home @ $700,000 to acquire a $600,000 loan which I pay back in full on time, But, I am then fined $7,000,000 for doing this bank fraud. This seems incredibly excessive.

Seems like the Court is a bigger crook than Trump and even more corrupt.

---

The injured party is his competitors that didn't get the favorable financing and followed the rules. Let's say you want to develop a piece of property, spend the money on plans, proposals, changing zonings and then compete against someone else that can offer more because they are paying 2 points lower interest. Financing based on made up values for collateral. Does it matter if they can pay it back?

Hell no, it is an unfair business practice and advantage. It sends a message the rules are for chumps. So more people inflate.

When 2008 happened everyone wanted stronger rules to prevent creative financing. But, it's Donald, rules don't count for him because you like his rhetoric. It's what we've become.

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

wait a second, your arguments are so compelling I've changed my mind. how dare trump generate millions for the parties to these deals, create jobs on new cre projects and build the nyc skyline. If only the democrats could've stopped him 20 years ago when they were schmoozing with him at nyc parties, smiling for the camera and hitting him up for donations. he's a menace I tell you!!! A MENACE!!!

FLBear5630 said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

Sorry, but the review is not abuse of discretion. Rather it is sufficiency of the evidence - something that is sorely lacking in this case as there is no evidence of a victim.

---

Haven't followed it closely, but I'm pretty sure no victim is required. I agree with Frank Galvin that the judgment looks excessive, at least at first glance.

---

So say I value a $350,000 home @ $700,000 to acquire a $600,000 loan which I pay back in full on time, But, I am then fined $7,000,000 for doing this bank fraud. This seems incredibly excessive.

Seems like the Court is a bigger crook than Trump and even more corrupt.

---

The injured party is his competitors that didn't get the favorable financing and followed the rules. Let's say you want to develop a piece of property, spend the money on plans, proposals, changing zonings and then compete against someone else that can offer more because they are paying 2 points lower interest. Financing based on made up values for collateral. Does it matter if they can pay it back?

Hell no, it is an unfair business practice and advantage. It sends a message the rules are for chumps. So more people inflate.

When 2008 happened everyone wanted stronger rules to prevent creative financing. But, it's Donald, rules don't count for him because you like his rhetoric. It's what we've become.

---

are they getting the money? honest question.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

Sorry, but the review is not abuse of discretion. Rather it is sufficiency of the evidence - something that is sorely lacking in this case as there is no evidence of a victim.

---

Haven't followed it closely, but I'm pretty sure no victim is required. I agree with Frank Galvin that the judgment looks excessive, at least at first glance.

---

So say I value a $350,000 home @ $700,000 to acquire a $600,000 loan which I pay back in full on time, But, I am then fined $7,000,000 for doing this bank fraud. This seems incredibly excessive.

Seems like the Court is a bigger crook than Trump and even more corrupt.

---

The injured party is his competitors that didn't get the favorable financing and followed the rules. Let's say you want to develop a piece of property, spend the money on plans, proposals, changing zonings and then compete against someone else that can offer more because they are paying 2 points lower interest. Financing based on made up values for collateral. Does it matter if they can pay it back?

Hell no, it is an unfair business practice and advantage. It sends a message the rules are for chumps. So more people inflate.

When 2008 happened everyone wanted stronger rules to prevent creative financing. But, it's Donald, rules don't count for him because you like his rhetoric. It's what we've become.

---

So. You list your home for $750k, because that's what you genuinely believe that's what it's worth (i.e. what you believe someone would be willing to pay for it). A year later, you sell it for $600k. You would have like to have gotten more and would have held onto it but you needed to sell (for any number of reasons).

By your own reasoning,, you just committed fraud.

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

wait a second, your arguments are so compelling I've changed my mind. how dare trump generate millions for the parties to these deals, create jobs on new cre projects and build the nyc skyline. If only the democrats could've stopped him 20 years ago when they were schmoozing with him at nyc parties, smiling for the camera and hitting him up for donations. he's a menace I tell you!!! A MENACE!!!

---

So, is it ok for me to lie on bank loan applications as long as I pay some of them back?

Have you considered what you could do if a bank gave you $500M? All that's required, in your world, is for you to value your assets to support the loan. It doesn't have to be true.

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

wait a second, your arguments are so compelling I've changed my mind. how dare trump generate millions for the parties to these deals, create jobs on new cre projects and build the nyc skyline. If only the democrats could've stopped him 20 years ago when they were schmoozing with him at nyc parties, smiling for the camera and hitting him up for donations. he's a menace I tell you!!! A MENACE!!!

---

So, is it ok for me to lie on bank loan applications as long as I pay some of them back?

---

only if you don't have seven bankruptcies

Anyway this happened. pic.twitter.com/T13JtA9qR5

— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) February 19, 2024

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

Wow, 6 bankruptcies? Never mind the other 249 Trump businesses that didn t file for bankruptcy, right? Got eeeemmm!!

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

The victim was Josh Gordon. That's why the rules are in place.

I am still in total disbelief that the NFL didn't give him a 9th chance!

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"The precedents being set will be used against democrats someday"

Good, fraud and criminality should not be tolerated, they should be ripped out root-and-stem. See how easy that was?

You are experiencing cognitive dissonance because you buy into the false notion that all politicians and parties are equally corrupt (a common coping mechanism on the right these days for supporting an unprecedented monster), and when reality pushes back on your delusions it causes you distress.

Speaking of precedents and politcized cases, the Clintons and Hunter Biden say hello. If you don't like your guy being prosecuted, maybe don't throw your lot in with criminals and thieves next time.

---

Who is the injured party?

---

If you speed through a school zone and don't have an accident, should you get a ticket? Who is the injured party?

However, this does sound excessive from this distance.

---

The banks have a right to refuse to loan money if they feel that there is fraud in the valuations of collateral. School children at a school crossing don't have that kind of option to avoid getting hit by a speeding car. Thus a difference in the handling of such cases.

A school zone speed limit is for the need of serious prevention.

Lending issues prevention should be handled by the parties negotiating a lending contract. If the contract is broken, then there is potential fraud case. Most prevention laws in the financial world are to prevent banks and brokerages from taking advantage of their customers.

---

Bernie Madoff yielded great returns …. for decades
Should the banks he defrauded have been reimbursed?

---

now trump is madoff. this thread has driven through a school zone, dodged a swerving drunk driver and crashed into a multibillion dollar ponzi scheme that landed the fraudster in jail for life.

---

Not what I said

I did say I thought this was excessive

---

your edit makes your point more clear. the fine is beyond excessive.

the real question is do independents find it excessive? democrats assume independents are enjoying all the swings at the trump pinata with the same glee, but maybe the've gone overboard already.

---

I'm Never Trump. It seems excessive

---

Fines typically are aligned with the benefit received. It's why when Tiger Woods got divorced, he paid $100M and I paid less. (Not by much. Just $100M)

Excessive? I'm don't know. I can assure you of this. If he were a Colombian soccer player and kept committing these own goals, the cartels would have a problem with him.

---

It sure how, but you insist on ignoring the reality that Dems are the US 'cartel'.

KaiBear said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

EatMoreSalmon said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"The precedents being set will be used against democrats someday"

Good, fraud and criminality should not be tolerated, they should be ripped out root-and-stem. See how easy that was?

You are experiencing cognitive dissonance because you buy into the false notion that all politicians and parties are equally corrupt (a common coping mechanism on the right these days for supporting an unprecedented monster), and when reality pushes back on your delusions it causes you distress.

Speaking of precedents and politcized cases, the Clintons and Hunter Biden say hello. If you don't like your guy being prosecuted, maybe don't throw your lot in with criminals and thieves next time.

---

Who is the injured party?

---

If you speed through a school zone and don't have an accident, should you get a ticket? Who is the injured party?

However, this does sound excessive from this distance.

---

The banks have a right to refuse to loan money if they feel that there is fraud in the valuations of collateral. School children at a school crossing don't have that kind of option to avoid getting hit by a speeding car. Thus a difference in the handling of such cases.

A school zone speed limit is for the need of serious prevention.

Lending issues prevention should be handled by the parties negotiating a lending contract. If the contract is broken, then there is potential fraud case. Most prevention laws in the financial world are to prevent banks and brokerages from taking advantage of their customers.

---

Bernie Madoff yielded great returns …. for decades
Should the banks he defrauded have been reimbursed?

---

now trump is madoff. this thread has driven through a school zone, dodged a swerving drunk driver and crashed into a multibillion dollar ponzi scheme that landed the fraudster in jail for life.

---

Not what I said

I did say I thought this was excessive

---

your edit makes your point more clear. the fine is beyond excessive.

the real question is do independents find it excessive? democrats assume independents are enjoying all the swings at the trump pinata with the same glee, but maybe the've gone overboard already.

---

I'm Never Trump. It seems excessive

---

Fines typically are aligned with the benefit received. It's why when Tiger Woods got divorced, he paid $100M and I paid less. (Not by much. Just $100M)

Excessive? I'm don't know. I can assure you of this. If he were a Colombian soccer player and kept committing these own goals, the cartels would have a problem with him.

---

It sure how, but you insist on ignoring the reality that Dems are the US 'cartel'.

---

Keep your eye on the sparrow.

KaiBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

I cannot fathom how in the world you TDSers find this acceptable.

---

A. Because they want their ' team ' to win in November by any means fair or foul.

B. They can not conceive that such an obviously biased legal procedure could ever be applied to them or someone they care about.

---

Why would the socialists possibly not
Win? All the rules were changed in 2020 and nothing has been changed back. Nobody will believe any of it ever again.

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

Sorry, but the review is not abuse of discretion. Rather it is sufficiency of the evidence - something that is sorely lacking in this case as there is no evidence of a victim.

---

Haven't followed it closely, but I'm pretty sure no victim is required. I agree with Frank Galvin that the judgment looks excessive, at least at first glance.

---

So say I value a $350,000 home @ $700,000 to acquire a $600,000 loan which I pay back in full on time, But, I am then fined $7,000,000 for doing this bank fraud. This seems incredibly excessive.

Seems like the Court is a bigger crook than Trump and even more corrupt.

---

The injured party is his competitors that didn't get the favorable financing and followed the rules. Let's say you want to develop a piece of property, spend the money on plans, proposals, changing zonings and then compete against someone else that can offer more because they are paying 2 points lower interest. Financing based on made up values for collateral. Does it matter if they can pay it back?

Hell no, it is an unfair business practice and advantage. It sends a message the rules are for chumps. So more people inflate.

When 2008 happened everyone wanted stronger rules to prevent creative financing. But, it's Donald, rules don't count for him because you like his rhetoric. It's what we've become.

---

are they getting the money? honest question.

---

I have no idea.

As someone that has worked on development projects, from the traffic-side, financing and terms can make or break a deal. Getting favorable terms, Govt tax benefits and/or redevelopment grants can make a "pig" doable.

So, I don't buy the victimless crime bit. Do we know who is the victim? Probably not, how many proposals died on the table due to not being able to make the money work? We will never know.

As I said, I was always part of the technical team on development projects, not THE Developer. I understand there are several that have been the Developer on this Board. I would be interested in their opinion.

Would favorable finance terms have made a difference? Would your projects have benefited from your assets being valued at 300 million more than they were really worth when attaining financing?

They’ve made it entirely justifiable to vote Trump solely on the basis of rejecting their machinery of persecution and personal destruction

If the justice system is just a weapon of the Left, everything else will fall as well

— Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) February 16, 2024

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

Wow, 6 bankruptcies? Never mind the other 249 Trump businesses that didn t file for bankruptcy, right? Got eeeemmm!!

---

That argument reminds me of the fellow being charged with his third DWI in 18months, asking the judge to take into account the hundreds of times he managed to get home without rearending a police car.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

Sorry, but the review is not abuse of discretion. Rather it is sufficiency of the evidence - something that is sorely lacking in this case as there is no evidence of a victim.

---

Haven't followed it closely, but I'm pretty sure no victim is required. I agree with Frank Galvin that the judgment looks excessive, at least at first glance.

---

So say I value a $350,000 home @ $700,000 to acquire a $600,000 loan which I pay back in full on time, But, I am then fined $7,000,000 for doing this bank fraud. This seems incredibly excessive.

Seems like the Court is a bigger crook than Trump and even more corrupt.

---

The injured party is his competitors that didn't get the favorable financing and followed the rules. Let's say you want to develop a piece of property, spend the money on plans, proposals, changing zonings and then compete against someone else that can offer more because they are paying 2 points lower interest. Financing based on made up values for collateral. Does it matter if they can pay it back?

Hell no, it is an unfair business practice and advantage. It sends a message the rules are for chumps. So more people inflate.

When 2008 happened everyone wanted stronger rules to prevent creative financing. But, it's Donald, rules don't count for him because you like his rhetoric. It's what we've become.

---

are they getting the money? honest question.

---

I have no idea.

As someone that has worked on development projects, from the traffic-side, financing and terms can make or break a deal. Getting favorable terms, Govt tax benefits and/or redevelopment grants can make a "pig" doable.

So, I don't buy the victimless crime bit. Do we know who is the victim? Probably not, how many proposals died on the table due to not being able to make the money work? We will never know.

As I said, I was always part of the technical team on development projects, not THE Developer. I understand there are several that have been the Developer on this Board. I would be interested in their opinion.

Would favorable finance terms have made a difference? Would your projects have benefited from your assets being valued at 300 million more than they were really worth when attaining financing?

---

we're lucky to have a lot of commercial real estate, banking and legal experts on this board. i'm sure they'll let us know.

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

Sorry, but the review is not abuse of discretion. Rather it is sufficiency of the evidence - something that is sorely lacking in this case as there is no evidence of a victim.

---

Haven't followed it closely, but I'm pretty sure no victim is required. I agree with Frank Galvin that the judgment looks excessive, at least at first glance.

---

So say I value a $350,000 home @ $700,000 to acquire a $600,000 loan which I pay back in full on time, But, I am then fined $7,000,000 for doing this bank fraud. This seems incredibly excessive.

Seems like the Court is a bigger crook than Trump and even more corrupt.

---

The injured party is his competitors that didn't get the favorable financing and followed the rules. Let's say you want to develop a piece of property, spend the money on plans, proposals, changing zonings and then compete against someone else that can offer more because they are paying 2 points lower interest. Financing based on made up values for collateral. Does it matter if they can pay it back?

Hell no, it is an unfair business practice and advantage. It sends a message the rules are for chumps. So more people inflate.

When 2008 happened everyone wanted stronger rules to prevent creative financing. But, it's Donald, rules don't count for him because you like his rhetoric. It's what we've become.

---

are they getting the money? honest question.

---

I have no idea.

As someone that has worked on development projects, from the traffic-side, financing and terms can make or break a deal. Getting favorable terms, Govt tax benefits and/or redevelopment grants can make a "pig" doable.

So, I don't buy the victimless crime bit. Do we know who is the victim? Probably not, how many proposals died on the table due to not being able to make the money work? We will never know.

As I said, I was always part of the technical team on development projects, not THE Developer. I understand there are several that have been the Developer on this Board. I would be interested in their opinion.

Would favorable finance terms have made a difference? Would your projects have benefited from your assets being valued at 300 million more than they were really worth when attaining financing?

---

we're lucky to have a lot of commercial real estate, banking and legal experts on this board. i'm sure they'll let us know.

---

Well, it is the only way that makes sense to me.

Should he have been tried? Have others been tried under same law? Will others be tried now that there is a precedent? Who knows.

Even if the answer is no, it doesn't change the fact that he is guilty and manipulated the financing of projects. Where it may get interesting is if any of the projects using that property for financing received Federal Funding?

I have little sympathy for mega-millionaires that abuse the system to make more money that get caught.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Forest Bueller said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

Sorry, but the review is not abuse of discretion. Rather it is sufficiency of the evidence - something that is sorely lacking in this case as there is no evidence of a victim.

---

Haven't followed it closely, but I'm pretty sure no victim is required. I agree with Frank Galvin that the judgment looks excessive, at least at first glance.

---

So say I value a $350,000 home @ $700,000 to acquire a $600,000 loan which I pay back in full on time, But, I am then fined $7,000,000 for doing this bank fraud. This seems incredibly excessive.

Seems like the Court is a bigger crook than Trump and even more corrupt.

---

The injured party is his competitors that didn't get the favorable financing and followed the rules. Let's say you want to develop a piece of property, spend the money on plans, proposals, changing zonings and then compete against someone else that can offer more because they are paying 2 points lower interest. Financing based on made up values for collateral. Does it matter if they can pay it back?

Hell no, it is an unfair business practice and advantage. It sends a message the rules are for chumps. So more people inflate.

When 2008 happened everyone wanted stronger rules to prevent creative financing. But, it's Donald, rules don't count for him because you like his rhetoric. It's what we've become.

---

are they getting the money? honest question.

---

I have no idea.

As someone that has worked on development projects, from the traffic-side, financing and terms can make or break a deal. Getting favorable terms, Govt tax benefits and/or redevelopment grants can make a "pig" doable.

So, I don't buy the victimless crime bit. Do we know who is the victim? Probably not, how many proposals died on the table due to not being able to make the money work? We will never know.

As I said, I was always part of the technical team on development projects, not THE Developer. I understand there are several that have been the Developer on this Board. I would be interested in their opinion.

Would favorable finance terms have made a difference? Would your projects have benefited from your assets being valued at 300 million more than they were really worth when attaining financing?

---

A version of the old joke... the devil approached a NYC RE Developer and offers him a $100mmm loan 100 basis points below anyone else, in exchange for his soul. Developer says, "I don't get it, what's the catch?"

"It's a wise investment."

Trump sneakers are selling out and going for good money on the secondary market. pic.twitter.com/W5mK32sCho

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) February 19, 2024

Common law fraud requires an intentional misrepresentation relied on by others and which causes damage. Fraud statutes often omit one or more of those elements. I have not looked up the New York statute but my guess is that the omitted elements mean Trump committed fraud under the statute.

But the law in almost all instances tries to resolve issue proportionate to the harm caused. Drive drunk and get caught? First time is a misdemeanor.

Drive drunk and cause an accident that kills someone? Go to jail on a felony.

Trump was lucky he didn't fall into the second category, unlucky the judge ignored that distinction.

Cobretti said:

---

"It's a wise investment."

Trump sneakers are selling out and going for good money on the secondary market. pic.twitter.com/W5mK32sCho

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) February 19, 2024

---

This is who they want for President.

We have become Idiocracy much faster than I thought. I thought it would be 50 to 75 years, it took 10.

TWD 1974 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

Wow, 6 bankruptcies? Never mind the other 249 Trump businesses that didn t file for bankruptcy, right? Got eeeemmm!!

---

That argument reminds me of the fellow being charged with his third DWI in 18months, asking the judge to take into account the hundreds of times he managed to get home without rearending a police car.

---

We'll that's because you're ignorant of what it takes to run a business, let alone 255 businesses simultaneously. That's the only reason one would try to equate the complexity of running a business with merely driving a car.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

"It's a wise investment."

Trump sneakers are selling out and going for good money on the secondary market. pic.twitter.com/W5mK32sCho

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) February 19, 2024

---

This is who they want for President.

We have become Idiocracy much faster than I thought. I thought it would be 50 to 75 years, it took 10.

---

this is who they want for president

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

"It's a wise investment."

Trump sneakers are selling out and going for good money on the secondary market. pic.twitter.com/W5mK32sCho

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) February 19, 2024

---

This is who they want for President.

We have become Idiocracy much faster than I thought. I thought it would be 50 to 75 years, it took 10.

---

this is who they want for president

---

I am sorry, picture didn't come out.

Wangchung said:

---

TWD 1974 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

Wow, 6 bankruptcies? Never mind the other 249 Trump businesses that didn t file for bankruptcy, right? Got eeeemmm!!

---

That argument reminds me of the fellow being charged with his third DWI in 18months, asking the judge to take into account the hundreds of times he managed to get home without rearending a police car.

---

We'll that's because you're ignorant of what it takes to run a business, let alone 255 businesses simultaneously. That's the only reason one would try to equate the complexity of running a business with merely driving a car.

---

I know enough about business to not invest with 6-time bankrupts. You may be successful in your own business, but you seem to lack reading comprehension and civility.

Cobretti said:

---

They’ve made it entirely justifiable to vote Trump solely on the basis of rejecting their machinery of persecution and personal destruction

If the justice system is just a weapon of the Left, everything else will fall as well

— Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) February 16, 2024

---

I am reconsidering voting for Trump after this latest civil monstrosity.

Dems have shown there is nothing they won't due to persecute their political enemies.

They are so far out of bounds it's alarming.

Might already be too late though.

Somehow, someway I expect Biden to get at least 90 million 'votes' this time around.

And 90% of the media will say it's legit.

Especially the media outlets based in New York. Those executives have gotten the message from this verdict loud and clear.

TWD 1974 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

TWD 1974 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

Crime? Who was the victim of this crime?

---

Crime doesn't require victims. They require laws.

---

Can't even name a hypothetical victim in this civil case?

---

So, you don't think we needs laws that require truth in loan applications? Every Hairy Dick Tom can provide any documentation and evaluation they want and it's not a crime unless the lender gets burned?

Might I remind you this is the guy who has filed bankruptcy six (6) times.

---

yet the "victims" still entered multimillion dollar transactions with armies of lawyers, accountants and financial gurus reviewing the deals. and they said they'd do business with him again. oh the horrorrrrrr.....

---

American banks won't. 6 bankruptcies. That's why the laws are in place.

Do you make for guys like Josh Gordon? There were no victims when he smoked weed.

---

Wow, 6 bankruptcies? Never mind the other 249 Trump businesses that didn t file for bankruptcy, right? Got eeeemmm!!

---

That argument reminds me of the fellow being charged with his third DWI in 18months, asking the judge to take into account the hundreds of times he managed to get home without rearending a police car.

---

We'll that's because you're ignorant of what it takes to run a business, let alone 255 businesses simultaneously. That's the only reason one would try to equate the complexity of running a business with merely driving a car.

---

I know enough about business to not invest with 249+ successful business ventures. You may be successful in your own business, but you seem to lack reading comprehension and civility.

---

Fixed it for you. See? Nice and civil.

Fre3dombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"I suspect this will be overturned on Appeal"

Based on what, exactly? The standard of review for appealing a subjective award is abuse of discretion, and good luck proving that when the award came under the state's ask. Especially when the defendant is so openly unrepentant in any way.

The finding of fraud is not going away, period. A reduction of the award is theoretically possible, but pretty unlikely given the record the appeals court will have to adhere to.

---

What were the damages ?

The bank reps testified they made all their interest on time.
In fact they were willing to lend Trump even more money.

And bank's routinely conduct their own appraisal.
And the judges appraisal of Trumps property was ludicrous.

Was in west palm beach and boca ration just 10 days ago looking at rental property.

18 million appraisal for Trumps property is nuts. It would easily be 80-100 million or more. Prices are sky high in that area.

---

Based on this argument, drunks should never be stopped or arrested until the accident happens. Where is the damage?

---

So have you ever watched the movie Minority Report starring Tom Cruise? This futuristic science fiction thriller has the Feds arresting people BEFORE they actually commit their crimes. Combine this with the Feds' January 6th response and we have 2024.

If you can't beat 'em, arrest 'em. Normally a FAIR and FREE election would clean up this abuse but I fear those days are gone.

---

Blagojevich says hello.

Jail is full of people who planned a crime. In this case, Trump DID the crime (lying on loan and tax documents)

But f the consequence for the Trump organization was $1,000, where's the deterrent?

It's not uncommon in sentencing for the A-Hole to get more time than the person who shows contrition.

---

I cannot fathom how in the world you TDSers find this acceptable.

---

A. Because they want their ' team ' to win in November by any means fair or foul.

B. They can not conceive that such an obviously biased legal procedure could ever be applied to them or someone they care about.

---

Why would the socialists possibly not
Win? All the rules were changed in 2020 and nothing has been changed back. Nobody will believe any of it ever again.

---

that isnt true.. some were changed back or reverted to original rules, some states wrote new rules. Some let 2020 rules stand.

...Of course, Gov. Hochul is suggesting that you have nothing to fear from such confiscatory actions unless you are Trump in New York. However, if the only protection in New York is the discretion of figures like James, few businesses would relish the future.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 19, 2024

Cobretti said:

---

...Of course, Gov. Hochul is suggesting that you have nothing to fear from such confiscatory actions unless you are Trump in New York. However, if the only protection in New York is the discretion of figures like James, few businesses would relish the future.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 19, 2024

---

Or, if your valuations were within a reasonable range and defensible. Apparently, the values used were not defensible.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

...Of course, Gov. Hochul is suggesting that you have nothing to fear from such confiscatory actions unless you are Trump in New York. However, if the only protection in New York is the discretion of figures like James, few businesses would relish the future.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 19, 2024

---

Or, if your valuations were within a reasonable range and defensible. Apparently, the values used were not defensible.

---

did the court review every major nyc real estate financing deal by every developer since statute enactment to make sure everyone is following the rules? honest question. just want to make sure democrats are catching all the bad guys while we're in follow the rules mode.

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

...Of course, Gov. Hochul is suggesting that you have nothing to fear from such confiscatory actions unless you are Trump in New York. However, if the only protection in New York is the discretion of figures like James, few businesses would relish the future.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 19, 2024

---

Or, if your valuations were within a reasonable range and defensible. Apparently, the values used were not defensible.

---

did the court review every major nyc real estate financing deal by every developer since statute enactment to make sure everyone is following the rules? honest question. just want to make sure democrats are catching all the bad guys while we're in follow the rules mode.

---

I assume not, or Trump would have had the appraiser on the stand showing the "comps" and the methodology used.

If they self-valuated, then whoever did it would have to not only show credentials but the methodology used. Since he lost and was cited for fraud, I am assuming his evidence was not compelling.

Do not know. I do know that it seems many are discounting that he over inflated values, basically saying everyone does it. Does that make him innocent?

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

...Of course, Gov. Hochul is suggesting that you have nothing to fear from such confiscatory actions unless you are Trump in New York. However, if the only protection in New York is the discretion of figures like James, few businesses would relish the future.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) February 19, 2024

---

Or, if your valuations were within a reasonable range and defensible. Apparently, the values used were not defensible.

---

did the court review every major nyc real estate financing deal by every developer since statute enactment to make sure everyone is following the rules? honest question. just want to make sure democrats are catching all the bad guys while we're in follow the rules mode.

---

I assume not, or Trump would have had the appraiser on the stand showing the "comps" and the methodology used.

If they self-valuated, then whoever did it would have to not only show credentials but the methodology used. Since he lost and was cited for fraud, I am assuming his evidence was not compelling.

Do not know. I do know that it seems many are discounting that he over inflated values, basically saying everyone does it. Does that make him innocent?

---

i don't know if everyone does it. my guess is these cases typically arise because there's an aggrieved party to a deal who raises hell in litigation or a whistleblower speaks up to authorities. it looks like ny singled out trump here (he's special and it's an election year, right?) and went hunting for any potentially actionable conduct. is there a state agency that watchdogs every transaction to go after fraud? or what would they find if they deal audit five random developers each year?

you guys keep arguing from the granular perspective of did trump deserve to lose this case or that case. I'm pointing out that independent voters (both parties need them to win) may ask questions about the big lawfare turd democrats have rolled up and thrown at trump. is it going to be effective in November or overkill, and what happens when Desantis, JD Vance or another "special" conservative gets too close to the white house in four years?

i'll hang up and listen.