Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Do you realize how stupid you sound?Trump will never pay a dollar
It wasn't offered as collateral at all. His personal wealth was. That wealth was backed by properties he overstated in his financial statements. Statements they went by. As for them being pleased. THEY BROKE TIES WITH HIM AFTER THIS INDICTEMENT BECAUSE HE DID THAT.just one question: did the banks do their own assessments of the value of the properties before accepting them as collateral for the loans? The banks testified that they were pleased with the transactions and were paid in full including interest and were paid early.
Oh really. They would do it again?So, according to you, the bank was too stupid to do their own due diligence? I assure you that is NOT the case...And they testified to exactly that....They said they were paid back with interest, and would make the loans again no problem....So, who was the victim here?
www.documentcloud.org
www.documentcloud.org
www.businessinsider.com
Deutsche Bank testified that they decreased the Trump stated value of his colleterial from 4.5 billion to 2.1 billion attempting to bring value of the colleterial to what is requires by law, the current market value of the assets.just one question: did the banks do their own assessments of the value of the properties before accepting them as collateral for the loans? The banks testified that they were pleased with the transactions and were paid in full including interest and were paid early.
Like most civil cases filed by the state, the victim; that is the plaintiff is the people of the State of New York. Someone that follows the law and states the market value of his assets is very likely to suffer because of people like Trump. Banks have limited time to value large portfolios of assets so they have to depend on their customer and the law to great extent.Oh really. They would do it again?
DocumentCloud
DocumentCloud
Trump's secret, ugly breakup with Deutsche Bank is revealed in new allegations by NY's attorney general
When Donald Trump sold his DC hotel for $375 million this May, Deutsche Bank had the financial equivalent of a gun to his head, court filings reveal.
"As a result of the Trump Organization's failure to respond, Deutsche Bank decided to exit its relationship with the company."
The formal decision was made by three bank executives during a Skype call on the afternoon of May 27, 2021, another of James' filings reveals.
This is what they thought about it. And what made them STOP their relationship.
You know what's interesting. Nor you or anyone on the right seems to bother with denying the facts of the case. You just excuse it to the point of making fraud not a crime as long as the mark falls for it.
When it’s the truth…Quote Trump much?
The problem is that you leftists rely solely on left wing sites that distort, or just make up crap.Oh really. They would do it again?
DocumentCloud
DocumentCloud
Trump's secret, ugly breakup with Deutsche Bank is revealed in new allegations by NY's attorney general
When Donald Trump sold his DC hotel for $375 million this May, Deutsche Bank had the financial equivalent of a gun to his head, court filings reveal.
"As a result of the Trump Organization's failure to respond, Deutsche Bank decided to exit its relationship with the company."
The formal decision was made by three bank executives during a Skype call on the afternoon of May 27, 2021, another of James' filings reveals.
This is what they thought about it. And what made them STOP their relationship.
You know what's interesting. Nor you or anyone on the right seems to bother with denying the facts of the case. You just excuse it to the point of making fraud not a crime as long as the mark falls for it.
I GAVE THE ACTUAL EXHIBITS AS WERE PRESENTED AT COURT. You cited SALON. One of us is using sources that confirms their biases. It isn't me. I'm by default very particular about sourcing. Precisely to defeat that ridiculous argument.The problem is that you leftists rely solely on left wing sites that distort, or just make up crap.
James ran for office on her, “getting Trump” … On targeting an individual, instead of targeting crime…That is Soviet by its nature.
Not how the US justice system is supposed to operate. And you’re good with it because you’re not content with just voting..
This civil statue is often used to collect a penalty and recover ill-gotten funds when the defendant is found guilty of the criminal statue. The DA spent some time early in the trial showing to the judges satisfaction that the two laws stand on their own; that is, the guilt in the criminal statue is not necessary to establish liability in the the civil statue.
to the judges satisfaction
I sourced Salon? Hmmm, I don’t remember that…you sure you’re talking to the right guy?I GAVE THE ACTUAL EXHIBITS AS WERE PRESENTED AT COURT. You cited SALON. One of us is using sources that confirms their biases. It isn't me. I'm by default very particular about sourcing. Precisely to defeat that ridiculous argument.
Fraud is exactly why this law was created. Trump broke this law. And he did so for personal financial gain, at the expense of the banks, the insurance companies, and the people of the State of New York.
You aren't gong to slither out from under these facts. Neither will Trump.
AM radio has you guys thinking appeals are "do overs".
It was reason.com. I apologize.I sourced Salon? Hmmm, I don’t remember that…you sure you’re talking to the right guy?
Of course not. They lent against an entire portfolio. If they have to order 10s or 100s of their own, third party appraisals for each application, they have to pass that cost to the borrower. The borrower already shouldered this cost by paying a third party to compile the financial statements. If the bank tries to charge the borrower for this, the borrower would go to a bank that does not. The borrower also would be burdened by the extra time and would go elsewhere.
No, this is the role the third party accounting group plays. In this case, Mazar's. It's a good system that keeps the money flowing. And, as with all lending, the burden of accuracy of the submitted materials ultimately lies with the borrower. The borrowers attest to this under penalty of law when signing the application and do so again at the closing table. Unless it can be shown that the third party accounting firm committed fraud or an egregious mistake, the burden of accuracy and honesty lies with the person signing this attestment. The moment Trump signed that application and submitted the statements compiled by Mazars, he broke the law. Then he did so again at the closing table, when signing the closing documents.
In this case, Mazars dropped Trump immediately and publicly stated that the financial statements they compiled for him cannot be trusted, which was of course due to Trump breaking his agreement with them by giving them inaccurate information. And as ordered by the courts, these statements were turned over.
What’s the matter with Reason.com? They’re not rabid right…It was reason.com. I apologize.
Same reasoning stands though.
I've taken care to source either directly or by citing sources that includes hyperlinks to the actual ruling or court exhibis. You have not.
Simply opinions and one link to prove some law that was designed to prevent corruption by appraisers actually insulates the lender from fraud statutes. An argument even Trump's legal team didn't even attempt.
They're right leaning. Not just that I've pointed out the omissions and fallacious arguments in that piece.What’s the matter with Reason.com? They’re not rabid right…
I use opinion pieces to make a point, and actual docs when necessary…I’m not a lawyer, and neither are you. So, your interpretation of the legal meanings of these docs is opinion.
The accounting firm that is hired to compile the financial statements. What right do you think a contractor has to examine the worth of assets of the people hiring them?This isn’t you or me getting a 50k home equity loan.
You are completely wrong with regards to these jumbo business loans. Banks ALWAYS do their due diligence. Regardless, in this case, you are attempting to say that Mazar’s didn’t do theirs, which is absurd. What accounting firm would sign their name certifying the value of assets without actually first evaluating the assets, knowing full well that their certification will be used in the determination of large loans?
Did DB go to James and file a complaint?They're right leaning. Not just that I've pointed out the omissions and fallacious arguments in that piece.
Regardless YOU accused ME for using biased sources, while my sources ALWAYS included the actual raw information.
Nothing about what you said came even close to it.
So I'll bring it back to the original argument before you started this little red herring of attacking my sources.
You claimed the banks weren't affected by this and would in fact give the same loan.
I showed by citing exhibits, that Deutsche bank was so displeased they terminated their affiliation. Do you concede that happened or do you want to deflect some more?
Deflect some more it is... got it. No, when the indictment came down they took note of the charges. Asked the Trump organization to give information about it to them. When they refused to do so, they broke ties.Did DB go to James and file a complaint?
With their loan that was paid back in full? Yes.Deflect some more it is... got it. No, when the indictment came down they took note of the charges. Asked the Trump organization to give information about it to them. When they refused to do so, they broke ties.
So I'll ask again do you still insist Deutsche bank was satisfied?
Then we are done. If you want to be deliberately obtuse to the point of simply ignoring the f-cking email chain were they express their displeasure, I can't stop you. What I can do is stop wasting my time.With their loan that was paid back in full? Yes.
