Deutsche Bank Betrays Trump

That’s the goal of the left, is it not?

I have to admit, I would find it pretty damn funny to see the grifter lose it all.

But, it will not happen so your god is safe....but keep sending him your money just in case.
 
I have to admit, I would find it pretty damn funny to see the grifter lose it all.

But, it will not happen so your god is safe....but keep sending him your money just in case.
I would have agreed with you a few months ago. But with all the evidence they have on Trump and his offspring, the Trump empire may be about to collapse.
 
:cuckoo: What makes you think he's frauding the bank giving the hypothetical loan?
Overvaluing his assets.if he attested to their value that opens the door. CAs have CPs related to the disclosure of information and it's veracity.
 
Empty rabbit hole? LMAO!!

This is the investigation by the NY AG. For his shady financial practices covering years. This is lying on financial disclosures and on the value of properties (and even the size). This is not Trump declassifying documents by just thinking about it.
haha the BY AG investigation is over…all they believe they have is some lawsuit alledging he did what all property owners do. try to devalue their teal estate for tax purposes, and value it high for loan purposes…no bank has claimed to have issues
 
Empty rabbit hole? LMAO!!

This is the investigation by the NY AG. For his shady financial practices covering years. This is lying on financial disclosures and on the value of properties (and even the size). This is not Trump declassifying documents by just thinking about it.
The word 'shady' doesn't accurately define it because the word shady gives the impression that what was done fell under an ill-defined 'gray area' of the law which is open to interpretation. That's not the case here. What the Trump Organization (meaning Trump himself) did was repeatedly engage in flat out illegal activity by submitting fraudulent documents to banks, insurance companies and the convening authorities of the State of NY.

Anyone who's ever had any interaction with companies, or the government knows that before submitting a document, a person or a representative of a company is asked to swear and or affirm that the document is a true and accurate representation of the facts.
 
The word 'shady' doesn't accurately define it because the word shady gives the impression that what was done fell under an ill-defined 'gray area' of the law which is open to interpretation. That's not the case here. What the Trump Organization (meaning Trump himself) did was repeatedly engage in flat out illegal activity by submitting fraudulent documents to banks, insurance companies and the convening authorities of the State of NY.

Anyone who's ever had any interaction with companies, or the government knows that before submitting a document, a person or a representative of a company is asked to swear and or affirm that the document is a true and accurate representation of the facts.
the problem is no bank or insurance company has filed a law suit claiming he’s done anything illegal.
 
Overvaluing his assets.if he attested to their value that opens the door. CAs have CPs related to the disclosure of information and it's veracity.
And you don’t think the bank, any bank doesn’t verify those assets in due diligence? Really? Wow! Show me that bank, I need some money.
 
And you don’t think the bank, any bank doesn’t verify those assets in due diligence? Really? Wow! Show me that bank, I need some money.
That make analysis of properties based on information derived from the tax rolls, but also from data provided by the Company. Is that data is fraudulent, its fraudulent.

We had a client spinning off a company, they dropped all the environmental liabilities into that company. They told us about the properties but grossly (geometrically) low balled the liabilities associated with them. When it imploded, the Bank group sued and won recourse back to the parent.
 
That make analysis of properties based on information derived from the tax rolls, but also from data provided by the Company. Is that data is fraudulent, its fraudulent.

We had a client spinning off a company, they dropped all the environmental liabilities into that company. They told us about the properties but grossly (geometrically) low balled the liabilities associated with them. When it imploded, the Bank group sued and won recourse back to the parent.
Oh, was it Trump?
 

Forum List

Back
Top