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.

---

said the attorney and the judge- neither are appraisers or real estate agents/developers. The banks said they were fair appraisals and he paid back the principle and interest without default.

NY is gonna run off a ton of business with this case. Law of unintended consequences is coming into play

Plus the Gov of NY just admitted the lawsuit was specific to get Trump. The prosecutor said they would get Trump as part of their campaign promises. This screams malicious prosecution.

"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"

The aggrieved whistleblower in this case is Michael Cohen, he laid it all out in sworn congressional testimony. They didn't have to look hard because he told them exactly where to look.

HuMcK said:

---

"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"

The aggrieved whistleblower in this case is Michael Cohen, he laid it all out in sworn congressional testimony. They didn't have to look hard because he told them exactly where to look.

---

so in this case we learned about it when the government squeezed trump's "aggrieved" lawyer. why doesn't the government squeeze more developer insiders to catch more bad guys? why is trump so special? i'm just asking questions.

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

they won't do this to haley. she's not "special."

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

Cobretti said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

they won't do this to haley. she's not "special."

---

If she got the nomination and left herself wide open like Trump, damn right they would.

This was not even hard for them. They have four cases and 91 charges on Trump! Anywhere they looked he left them a nice easter egg to take to court. It is almost comical, if it didn't have such ramifications, it was so easy.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Bank fraud is bank fraud, don't care what state. His level of fraud is just a piece of his make up. Ya, just can't inflate and defeat assets like has always done. It is criminal.

---

TDS has decayed your brain. A little surprising to me you see no problem with this. They may come for you next.

---

You call me TDS which is just stupid. I call you dumb and just ****ing stupid!

As far as I can see, I'm not sure how this would not be overturned.

I would think that the bank would have a fiduciary duty to perform due diligence before they agree to lend money.

That being said, with no victim, this court decision is silly and a waste of NY taxpayer dollars.

In fact, I think if it is not overturned then Trump will gain because most can look at it and say no harm, no foul.

As far as an advantage over competition goes, it really depends if he owns the property or not. If he does and he is getting a loan for developing only, then it really doesn't matter and makes the court decision even more puzzling.

From afar, this clearly looks political and bad for the U.S.

Same for the ballot bans that some states are trying to implement.

Really bad precedent.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

J.R. said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Bank fraud is bank fraud, don't care what state. His level of fraud is just a piece of his make up. Ya, just can't inflate and defeat assets like has always done. It is criminal.

---

TDS has decayed your brain. A little surprising to me you see no problem with this. They may come for you next.

---

You call me TDS which is just stupid. I call you dumb and just ****ing stupid!

---

Excellent response! Keep up the good work.

Do shoe cults still end up like this?

Mitch Blood Green said:

---

Do shoe cults still end up like this?

---

no, they end up like this...

CNN analyzes Trump’s Truth Social merger

“How much would Trump’s shares be worth if it does in fact go public? It could be upwards of $4 billion. That’s billion with a B—not million with an M”

They’re trying to shut down his empire and he’s getting richer 🔥 pic.twitter.com/aHahi8FcgS

— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) February 19, 2024

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

He just listed the alleged crimes. Why would it matter that we don't do this to Presidents who are not alleged criminals.


Or is election interference, theft of classified documents and real estate fraud not crimes if DJT commits them.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

even if joe runs the table on these cases (very possible in this political/judicial climate), you still have to wonder how it looks in the court of public opinion outside of the deep blues:

property - the punishment stinks of radical leftist bloodlust.
documents - all the case differences aside, americans have seen pictures of the careless boxes in joe's garage.
jan 6 riot - is there stone cold proof that colonel jessup ordered the code red?
georgia - oh fani...ohhh fani...and is that call specific enough to prove anything with certainty?

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

He just listed the alleged crimes. Why would it matter that we don't do this to Presidents who are not alleged criminals.


Or is election interference, theft of classified documents and real estate fraud not crimes if DJT commits them.

---

You aren't understanding the question. You're looking at this through blue tinted hindsight rather than what spurred the investigations in the first place; being Republican Trump. THAT is the problem. You don't get to bring an investigation against your political opponents simply because they are your political opponents.

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

I did answer it. Your question is wrong, there are alleged crimes instigating the investigations.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

There are alleged crimes.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

I did answer it. Your question is wrong, there are alleged crimes instigating the investigations.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

There are alleged crimes.

---

No one alleged he overvalued property until after an investigation began. He was negotiating the specifics of what the National Archives were requesting when the raid happened . Telling people to demonstrate peacefully and patriotically didn't lead to the anger displayed Jan 6th, the behavior of democrats the previous four years led to it. We all know about the Georgia scam and Fani Willis. You're obviously a "Stop and Frisk" kinda guy.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

I did answer it. Your question is wrong, there are alleged crimes instigating the investigations.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

There are alleged crimes.

---

1-nope
2-GAS did but him not giving them back is a PRA fight more than criminal fight. Strongest of the 4
3-not a crime to give a speech while congress is certifying- GTFO with that sh..
4-He asked GA to do everything possible to make sure the election was tallied correctly. Ask ATL about the sh..show that 2020 GA election was

The records is the only alledged crime of significance

4th and Inches said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

I did answer it. Your question is wrong, there are alleged crimes instigating the investigations.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

There are alleged crimes.

---

1-nope
2-GAS did but him not giving them back is a PRA fight more than criminal fight. Strongest of the 4
3-not a crime to give a speech while congress is certifying- GTFO with that sh..
4-He asked GA to do everything possible to make sure the election was tallied correctly. Ask ATL about the sh..show that 2020 GA election was

The records is the only alledged crime of significance

---

and old joe took a lot of the wind out of that one after america saw his classified docs orgie in the garage. never underestimate joe's ability to...

Let me first state that of course it is ethically wrong to lie about the value of property for financial gain or advantage. And if is against NY law to do this, then it would be legally wrong too.

But here's my problem with this: if the banks feel they were defrauded by Trump, then THEY should be the one to bring the complaint. The "victim" of the parties involved should always be the one to do this, not an uninvolved third party. Of course, NY can claim they are a victim in the sense that such fraud 1) puts NY at risk financially in the case the loan is defaulted, and the value of the collateral isn't enough to cover the losses, 2) encourages further fraud from the business or other businesses, 3) causes NY to lose revenue from what could have been generated from taxes on bank profits, since there would have been a higher percentage rate on the loan, or 4) make less money available from banks to loan out to other NY businesses or ventures.

Each of these would be a valid argument for NY - but it would depend on NY being able to prove that the banks would not have given out the same loan to Trump at the same terms anyway, even if he had NOT grossly overvalued his property. I don't know if they can even prove this, unless the bank says so. But whatever Trump valued his property at, the banks ultimately signed off on it, meaning the two parties effectively agreed to the valuation, as well as to the amount and terms of the loan. If the bank made a mistake and feel they were defrauded, then they can bring the charge, and then the state of NY has a case against Trump. If not, then I don't see the merit in this NY law or this court case. Am I missing something? I am fully open to being wrong.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Let me first state that of course it is ethically wrong to lie about the value of property for financial gain or advantage. And if is against NY law to do this, then it would be legally wrong too.

But here's my problem with this: if the banks feel they were defrauded by Trump, then THEY should be the one to bring the complaint. The "victim" of the parties involved should always be the one to do this, not an uninvolved third party. Of course, NY can claim they are a victim in the sense that such fraud 1) puts NY at risk financially in the case the loan is defaulted, and the value of the collateral isn't enough to cover the losses, 2) encourages further fraud from the business or other businesses, 3) causes NY to lose revenue from what could have been generated from taxes on bank profits, since there would have been a higher percentage rate on the loan, or 4) make less money available from banks to loan out to other NY businesses or ventures.

Each of these would be a valid argument for NY - but it would depend on NY being able to prove that the banks would not have given out the same loan to Trump at the same terms anyway, even if he had NOT grossly overvalued his property. I don't know if they can even prove this, unless the bank says so. But whatever Trump valued his property at, the banks ultimately signed off on it, meaning the two parties effectively agreed to the valuation, as well as to the amount and terms of the loan. If the bank made a mistake and feel they were defrauded, then they can bring the charge, and then the state of NY has a case against Trump. If not, then I don't see the merit in this NY law or this court case. Am I missing something? I am fully open to being wrong.

---

What about competitors that wanted to compete for that money or locations? They were not able to because of false statements?

The conditions of the loans required truth in lending, some required maintaining wealth level of 2.5 b, he was no where close at the time of the loans nevermind maintaining that level.

I am sorry the more I read into this, the more I agree with NY. He doubled his worth and used those values to secure financing. Seen too many real estate deals fall through because of financing to gave sympathy. He got caught. Simple as that

FLBear5630 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Let me first state that of course it is ethically wrong to lie about the value of property for financial gain or advantage. And if is against NY law to do this, then it would be legally wrong too.

But here's my problem with this: if the banks feel they were defrauded by Trump, then THEY should be the one to bring the complaint. The "victim" of the parties involved should always be the one to do this, not an uninvolved third party. Of course, NY can claim they are a victim in the sense that such fraud 1) puts NY at risk financially in the case the loan is defaulted, and the value of the collateral isn't enough to cover the losses, 2) encourages further fraud from the business or other businesses, 3) causes NY to lose revenue from what could have been generated from taxes on bank profits, since there would have been a higher percentage rate on the loan, or 4) make less money available from banks to loan out to other NY businesses or ventures.

Each of these would be a valid argument for NY - but it would depend on NY being able to prove that the banks would not have given out the same loan to Trump at the same terms anyway, even if he had NOT grossly overvalued his property. I don't know if they can even prove this, unless the bank says so. But whatever Trump valued his property at, the banks ultimately signed off on it, meaning the two parties effectively agreed to the valuation, as well as to the amount and terms of the loan. If the bank made a mistake and feel they were defrauded, then they can bring the charge, and then the state of NY has a case against Trump. If not, then I don't see the merit in this NY law or this court case. Am I missing something? I am fully open to being wrong.

---

What about competitors that wanted to compete for that money or locations? They were not able to because of false statements?

The conditions of the loans required truth in lending, some required maintaining wealth level of 2.5 b, he was no where close at the time of the loans nevermind maintaining that level.

I am sorry the more I read into this, the more I agree with NY. He doubled his worth and used those values to secure financing. Seen too many real estate deals fall through because of financing to gave sympathy. He got caught. Simple as that

---

do we know this as fact? do we know that specific competitors lost projects caused by trump's actions? do we have their asset valuations to finance the lost deals? are they 100% accurate? can a rogue developer go undetected for years if no one ever cries foul? do good guy developers that follow the rules have no idea they're being regularly undercut by fraudster competitors? if so, how do they stay in business if it goes undetected until the most important election to save our democracy?

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

He just listed the alleged crimes. Why would it matter that we don't do this to Presidents who are not alleged criminals.


Or is election interference, theft of classified documents and real estate fraud not crimes if DJT commits them.

---

You aren't understanding the question. You're looking at this through blue tinted hindsight rather than what spurred the investigations in the first place; being Republican Trump. THAT is the problem. You don't get to bring an investigation against your political opponents simply because they are your political opponents.

---

You are trying way too hard to make excuses for him. The election interference stuff was out in the open. He begged for the classified documents case by refusing to return the documents. He and his people openly boasted about inflating valuations.


Trump has always thought the law does not apply to him. The interesting thing is he has convinced 40% of Americans of the same thing.

4th and Inches said:

---

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.

---

I stand by my position. Make sure to mail in on 2024. The octogenarians will check signatures. The rest of us can mask up and risk our lives for the freedom of our grandchildren

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Frank Galvin said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

I am going to focus on the what happens if a GOP gets close in the next 4 years.

My answer is that the cleaner the Candidate the less of an issue it is. There was something here for the Dems to leverage. They exploited Trumps sloppiness and inability to follow rules.

So, in my opinion there is a huge difference between going after a DeSantis or Haley on relationships or a comment than getting the GOP Nominee in Court and them losing. Trump is a lightning rod, sloppy and arrogantly loud, that is what opened the door for all this ***** DeSantis and Haley would be tougher to get like this. I don't know Vance enough.

---

So basically, "If you have nothing to hide you would welcome the politically driven investigations." Got it.

---

Welcome? Who in their right mind welcomes it. You decide to run for President or Congress, you better be prepared and have nothing to hide.

If you do, they (both GOP or Dems) will find it and exploit it. You don't want your past to be explored, don't run for the most powerful man in the world job. That goes with the territory.

---

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

Name one that left himself in a position to be investigated?? There has to be something to investigate and charge. In every case there is enough to charge him.

He did overvalue his property for financial gain.
He did bring documents he wasn't supposed to have to Mar Lago and didn't give them back.
He did give the Jan 6th speech while Congress was certifying.
He did tell GA to find more votes on a monitored call.

You seem to be pushing aside he did everything they said. There is nothing made up here. Your argument is based on whether they should have charged him because others did it too or similar and weren't charged... He did everything they said. None of these cases is about guilt or innocence, it is about whether someone else was charged or it is worth charging him. The guy's guilt is not even in question.

---

Wait a second, you ignored my question. Go back and read it again and answer it this time.

Name one other presidential candidate being investigated with no alleged crimes instigating the investigations, just name and political affiliation inspiring the investigation.

---

He just listed the alleged crimes. Why would it matter that we don't do this to Presidents who are not alleged criminals.


Or is election interference, theft of classified documents and real estate fraud not crimes if DJT commits them.

---

You aren't understanding the question. You're looking at this through blue tinted hindsight rather than what spurred the investigations in the first place; being Republican Trump. THAT is the problem. You don't get to bring an investigation against your political opponents simply because they are your political opponents.

---

You are trying way too hard to make excuses for him. The election interference stuff was out in the open. He begged for the classified documents case by refusing to return the documents. He and his people openly boasted about inflating valuations.


Trump has always thought the law does not apply to him. The interesting thing is he has convinced 40% of Americans of the same thing.

---

More

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

We know what they'll Do. Mit Romney was a closet womanizer / sexual assault
Predator waiting to happen. Thankfully the media discovered that just before the election to save us from that so we could keep loser Obama to "have a little more leeway" form4 years handing over territory to Russia and wrecking the economy with deic Obamacare efc etc

Fre3dombear said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

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.

---

I stand by my position. Make sure to mail in on 2024. The octogenarians will check signatures. The rest of us can mask up and risk our lives for the freedom of our grandchildren

---

i will be in line but I am not wearing a mask or risking anything.. had covid 2 times, no biggie.

4th and Inches said:

---

Fre3dombear said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

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.

---

I stand by my position. Make sure to mail in on 2024. The octogenarians will check signatures. The rest of us can mask up and risk our lives for the freedom of our grandchildren

---

i will be in line but I am not wearing a mask or risking anything.. had covid 2 times, no biggie.

---

It was no biggie for Most everyone. The fools are those that vaxxed and boosted for nothing except a .00000000001% of people

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.

---

They need to. After all, this is supposed to be a country where we prosecutes crime, not people.

Fre3dombear said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

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.

---

We know what they'll Do. Mit Romney was a closet womanizer / sexual assault
Predator waiting to happen. Thankfully the media discovered that just before the election to save us from that so we could keep loser Obama to "have a little more leeway" form4 years handing over territory to Russia and wrecking the economy with deic Obamacare efc etc

---

Ah, "The Binders Full of Women" narrative during 2012. Almost forgot about that.