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

[MagicMike]

Trump will never pay a dollar

Do you realize how stupid you sound?
Trump's appeal(s) could take up to two years and in the meantime he has to pay every penny of these judgements plus some to the courts or else have his assets seized.
You really need to learn a bit about what you are trying to speak on before making a fool of yourself in public.

 

[forkup]

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.

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.

 

[forkup]

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?

Oh really. They would do it again?

DeutscheBankTrumpEmailChain

www.documentcloud.org

DeutscheBankLetter12:7:20

www.documentcloud.org

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.

www.businessinsider.com

"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.

 

[Flopper]

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.

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.

Trump looked into his crystal ball and determined the value of Mar a Lago was 1 to 1.5 making assumption that it would someday be turned in residential homes and his New York penthouse would increase size by 300%.

Maybe the law should be changed, however doing so is not up to Trump.

 

[Flopper]

Oh really. They would do it again?

DeutscheBankTrumpEmailChain

www.documentcloud.org

DeutscheBankLetter12:7:20

www.documentcloud.org

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.

www.businessinsider.com

"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.

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.

 

[j-mac]

Quote Trump much?

When it’s the truth…

 

[j-mac]

Oh really. They would do it again?

DeutscheBankTrumpEmailChain

www.documentcloud.org

DeutscheBankLetter12:7:20

www.documentcloud.org

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.

www.businessinsider.com

"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.

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..

 

[forkup]

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..

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.

 

[SweetTea]

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.

How often has the criminal statute been used in this way? Has the state, NOT the bank, used this statute to bring charges against a corporation claiming that a large, sophisticated bank was the victim of fraud? If is nefarious at best.

to the judges satisfaction

The judge didn’t need to be convinced of anything. He was tasked with figuring out a way to legally get Trump. He is an activist. An appeal with any sensible judge would have this case dismissed or at the very least, a HUGE deduction in the damages awarded. I have a hard time believing that any reasonable, none-partisan judge would award damages for a supposed crime where nobody was harmed and the supposed victim didn’t even claim to be a victim at all.

 

[j-mac]

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.

I sourced Salon? Hmmm, I don’t remember that…you sure you’re talking to the right guy?

 

[SweetTea]

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".

How did this cost the state of NY, the banks and the insurance companies money? Don’t give me line that the rates would have been higher had he not allegedly over-value his real estate. That is pure speculation. The banks knew exactly who they were lending to and they knew within reason the value of his assets. They wanted the loan and they made a lot of money because they took the risk, if you want to even call it that.

This case would have never seen a court room in a non-partisan city/state. They wouldn’t even allow the trial to be moved outside the city because they knew they didn’t have a case. They needed a crooked, partisan judge to pull it off and they got it.

 

[forkup]

I sourced Salon? Hmmm, I don’t remember that…you sure you’re talking to the right guy?

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 attempt.

 

[SweetTea]

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.

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?

 

[j-mac]

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.

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.

 

[forkup]

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.

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?

 

[forkup]

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?

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?


It's funny that all of you like to use the term "due diligence" this entity needs to do so, this entity needs to do so.

The only people who seem to have no obligation to do any type of diligence due or undue. Is the Trump organization. Funny that.

 

[j-mac]

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?

Did DB go to James and file a complaint?

 

[forkup]

Did DB go to James and file a complaint?

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?

 

[j-mac]

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?

With their loan that was paid back in full? Yes.

 

[forkup]

With their loan that was paid back in full? Yes.

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.

You were complaining about bias? Maybe you should check yourself.