Judge orders Trump to pay nearly $355 million in civil fraud trial

[forkup]

no, you quoted comments made by left wing media, which were lies.

I directly quoted from the judgement. Which had testimony in it. If you're simply going to claim stuff make sure it's not so obvious.

 

[forkup]

You are wrong.
The judge disagrees with you and his is the only opinion that matters.
And no, an appellate court is not at all likely to overturn this case.
This is a done deal.
Shouldn't you MAGAt syncophants be moving on from this one and looking to next month's criminal trial?
That is the one that could potentially mean prison time for your hero.
He's going to need all your lame excuses and weak-assed defenses about how his guilty verdict in that trial is actually someone else's fault as well so you'd better get started early.

You are mistaking Mike. They have an infinite amount of lame excuses and weak-ass defenses. They don't need to move on, there's plenty more where that came from.

 

[j-mac]

At the moment nobody even knows he'll be able to come up with the cash to even get to appeal. But let's suppose he does. I've read the judgement. Something I'm sure you haven't.

It's detailed, goes over all the witnesses, what they testified to. How credible they were or weren't. That stuff isn't appealable.

What is left is the amount of damages and how the law is applied. The judgement lays out in great detail how the amount of damages was calculated and he's a judge applying a pretty common and broad anti-corruption law in New York.

I don't know what the basis for an appeal would even be or if he has the money to get to an appeal within 30 days.

I suspect he'll be able to come up with the cash. I highly doubt he'll get anywhere on appeal.

Yeah ok….we shall see…

 

[SeaMajor7]

I directly quoted from the judgement. Which had testimony in it. If you're simply going to claim stuff make sure it's not so obvious.

The JUDGEMENT is INSANE.
You're basing your long winded diatribes on the JUDGEMENT of an INSANE Marxist ASSHOLE.
You can read his JUDGEMENT 1,000 times, it is still INSANE.

 

[j-mac]

No that would run counter the probable cause doctrine. In this case his trouble started because his lawyer and him were implicated in a tax evasion scheme. Giving probable cause. Prompting an investigation into the Trump organizations financial dealings. An investigation that led to a conviction for long term persistent fraudulent behavior.

You keep on putting up the strawman and false equivalency that "everybody lies about their property assessment (not true), therefore everybody who ever gets a loan should be investigated. Otherwise it's unfair."

First of all, it's an appeal to hypocrisy.

Second Trump didn't just exaggerate his property value on some type of subjective evaluation. He lied about the amount of properties he could build, lied about the size of his properties, state of the properties, building rights he had on properties, AND ignored actual property valuations, put his own value on it several orders of magnitude the valuations, and then claimed that that was the conclusion of the assessor. Those things are fraud and I dare you to claim otherwise or make any equivalency to Joe from down the street saying his property is worth 200k , instead of 190k.

So, bank now just accept what the borrower says their property is worth?

 

[j-mac]

You are wrong.
The judge disagrees with you and his is the only opinion that matters.
And no, an appellate court is not at all likely to overturn this case.
This is a done deal.
Shouldn't you MAGAt syncophants be moving on from this one and looking to next month's criminal trial?
That is the one that could potentially mean prison time for your hero.
He's going to need all your lame excuses and weak-assed defenses about how his guilty verdict in that trial is actually someone else's fault as well so you'd better get started early.

I understand you want to move on as quickly as possible, your quest to destroy Trump in Stalinist fashion must be done before the election…Because that’s what this nonsense has always been about…

 

[forkup]

So, bank now just accept what the borrower says their property is worth?

No, bank accepts the financial statements of large companies who have a responsibility under their license to do business to give correct financial statements.

Markarian stated that because the Trump Organization is a private company, not a publicly traded company, there is very little that underwriters can do to learn about its financial condition,other than to rely on the financial documents that the client provides to them.

The whole point of these things is that the people who put their signatures under these statements are OBLIGATED BY LAW, to ensure they're correct.

You guys keep on claiming they're not.

 

[j-mac]

No, bank accepts the financial statements of large companies who have a responsibility under their license to do business to give correct financial statements.


The whole point of these things is that the people who put their signatures under these statements are OBLIGATED BY LAW, to ensure they're correct.

You guys keep on claiming they're not.

I’ve never heard of ANY bank considering a loan on what the borrower says his assets are worth…Doesn’t happen.

 

[forkup]

I’ve never heard of ANY bank considering a loan on what the borrower says his assets are worth…Doesn’t happen.

Read the verdict. Instead of making claims. Again, I'm providing DIRECT quotes from witnesses.


Being willfully ignorant doesn't change the facts. Several of which I've provided and are easily accessible and verifiable by clicking the links.

Be brave. Test your preconceptions, or not. Either way it's on you to inform yourself, I can help you locate the information. I can't force you to actually read it.

 

[j-mac]

Read the verdict. Instead of making claims. Again, I'm providing DIRECT quotes from witnesses.


Being willfully ignorant doesn't change the facts. Several of which I've provided and are easily accessible and verifiable by clicking the links.

Be brave. Test your preconceptions, or not. Either way it's on you to inform yourself, I can help you locate the information. I can't force you to actually read it.

Well, there’s no convincing you. Your mind is made up…

 

[SeaMajor7]

Read the verdict. Instead of making claims. Again, I'm providing DIRECT quotes from witnesses.


Being willfully ignorant doesn't change the facts. Several of which I've provided and are easily accessible and verifiable by clicking the links.

Be brave. Test your preconceptions, or not. Either way it's on you to inform yourself, I can help you locate the information. I can't force you to actually read it.

Fuckup here makes baby Stalin blush.

 

[forkup]

Well, there’s no convincing you. Your mind is made up…

I'm actually pretty easy to convince. Providing you give me verifiable information that bolster your argument.

You could for instance give me some statute that lays the burden for correct financial statements at another place then the people signing those statements.

Or you could go through the judgement and find me some testimony that bolsters it.

At the moment I have a statement by you, not supported by anything.

I'm actually capable and have changed my mind on this board more than once. Not just that, simply said so to the person I was arguing with.

Doubtful you can say the same.

 

[forkup]

Fuckup here makes baby Stalin blush.

Lol. I don't think asking and providing correct information is a reason to blush.

But then again I'm not the one trying to argue that a statement is enough to convince someone.

 

[j-mac]

I'm actually pretty easy to convince. Providing you give me verifiable information that bolster your argument.

You could for instance give me some statute that lays the burden for correct financial statements at another place then the people signing those statements.

Or you could go through the judgement and find me some testimony that bolsters it.

At the moment I have a statement by you, not supported by anything.

I'm actually capable and have changed my mind on this board more than once. Not just that, simply said so to the person I was arguing with.

Doubtful you can say the same.

Because it’s so elementary….

”In fact, under Federal law, a bank is not allowed to accept an appraisal ordered by either the borrower or his mortgage broker.”

Commercial Appraisals

Commercial Appraisals Commercial real estate appraisals are usually very expensive. You will seldom see a commercial appraisal for less than $2,000; and $4,000 is probably the most common cost these days for commercial real estate loans of around

www.c-loans.com

 

[SeaMajor7]

Lol. I don't think asking and providing correct information is a reason to blush.

But then again I'm not the one trying to argue that a statement is enough to convince someone.

There's NOTHING "correct" about any of this Stalinist BULLSHIT in the United States.
It's amazing seeing you fucking retarded IDIOTS cheering on this disgusting travesty.
You know, fuckup, Trotsky thought he was all in with the Stalinist Struggle...........until he got the

 

[Redfish]

Read the F...ing judgement.

I read it, it is full of lies. it will be overturned on appeal, even by the dem appointed NY appeals court.

 

[Redfish]

for all of our resident trump-hating libtardians. Who is the victim in this case? Who was harmed? Who lost money?

There was no crime, the judge is insane.

 

[MagicMike]

I read it, it is full of lies. it will be overturned on appeal, even by the dem appointed NY appeals court.

Probably not.
At any rate an appeal could take up to two years to resolve. Meanwhile Trump is out half a billion dollars and cannot conduct business in NY for three years.
He's SCREWED!
And his criminal trials haven't even started yet.
He'll be in prison by November.

 

[Flopper]

Trump says he doesn't know if he could work with Mitch McConnell if re-elected

GREENVILLE, S.C. — Former President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he was uncertain if he could work with former ally turned political foe Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell if he were to be re-elected as president.

news.yahoo.com

During the town hall, Trump also addressed the death of Alexei Navalny, comparing the Russian opposition leader's death to his own legal woes and criminal indictments.

“It’s a horrible thing," he said. "But it’s happening in our country too. We are turning into a communist country in many ways. And if you look at it, I’m the leading candidate. I got indicted — I never heard of being indicted.”

Trump also suggested Navalny would have been better off had he done his political advocacy from outside the danger of Russia.

“He was a very brave guy because he went back, he could have stayed away, and frankly, probably would have been a lot better off staying away and talking from outside of the country as opposed to having to go back in because people thought that could happen and it did happen,” Trump said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Navalny, a fierce critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, died suddenly Friday in prison, the country's prison service said. President Joe Biden blamed Putin for Navalny's death and said Tuesday that the U.S. would impose additional sanctions on Russia in response.

It's interesting that whenever he speaks of persecution of others, he always relates it to those that persecutor him. I suppose that is the way he sees the world. It always about Trump.

 

[Flopper]

for all of our resident trump-hating libtardians. Who is the victim in this case? Who was harmed? Who lost money?

There was no crime, the judge is insane.

He was charged with a Civil violation and found liable. The criminal cases are coming soon.