Letitia James indicted

[Robert W]

The trump Org. defaulted on a $640M construction loan in 2008.

I will examine your allegation once you post proof of your claim. You said org, you mean corporation?

 

[berg80]

Corporations bankrupted or did not pay loans. Trump was a stockholder.

So the way you're weaseling out of this is by the fact trump didn't personally owe the money, the organization he ran did. Of course a bank wouldn't loan him the money personally if the assets backing up the loan were owned by an incorporated organization.

Aren't we getting far afield from the suit against James? A charge of mortgage fraud for which she stood to benefit by the sum of around $19K whereas the trump Org., and thus trump personally, benefitted to the tune of millions of dollars by misrepresenting the value of properties the Org. took out loans against.

 

[Robert W]

Stockholders are wiped out in a bankruptcy. First in line to recoup any money are first tranche bond holders.

That is accurate.

 

[Marener]

Stockholders as Trump was, is never charged to stockholders as their bankruptcy. When a person owns stock, never are they held to account for acts of the corporation.

Corporations bankrupted or did not pay loans. Trump was a stockholder.

The Trump Organization defaulted on the loan, the same organization at the center of the James’s lawsuit.

The point being that the bank had reason to be concerned about the potential for Trump to default.

 

[Robert W]

So the way you're weaseling out of this is by the fact trump didn't personally owe the money, the organization he ran did. Of course a bank wouldn't loan him the money personally if the assets backing up the loan were owned by an incorporated organization.

You hate Trump so you seem to hate the idea of a corporation blowing out stockholders, so they lose money and shift it to Trump. Study corporations.

 

[Robert W]

The Trump Organization defaulted on the loan, the same organization at the center of the James’s lawsuit.

The point being that the bank had reason to be concerned about the potential for Trump to default.

And as a stockholder, Trump got wiped out. Trump for a fact never personally filed for bankruptcy.

 

[Marener]

And as a stockholder, Trump got wiped out. Trump for a fact never personally filed for bankruptcy.

Uh, what? They renegotiated the loan and the bank took a loss. He wasn’t wiped out. He got hundreds of millions of debt wiped away.

I never said he filed for personal bankruptcy, but it’s a fact that Trump defaults on loans.

 

[Robert W]

After presiding over a non-jury trial that began on October 2, 2023, and ended on December 13,2023, with closing arguments on January 11, 2024, this Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law and issues this Decision and Order:

SUMMARY

Donald Trump and entities he controls own many valuable properties, including office buildings, hotels, and golf courses. Acquiring and developing such properties required huge amounts of cash. Accordingly, the entities borrowed from banks and other lenders. The lenders required personal guarantees from Donald Trump, which were based on statements of financial condition compiled by accountants that Donald Trump engaged. The accountants created these “compilations” based on data submitted by the Trump entities. In order to borrow more and at lower rates, defendants submitted blatantly false financial data to the accountants, resulting in fraudulent financial statements. When confronted at trial with the statements, defendants’ fact and expert witnesses simply denied reality, and defendants failed to accept responsibility or to impose internal controls to prevent future recurrences. As detailed herein, this Court now finds defendants liable, continues the appointment of an Independent Monitor, orders the installation of an Independent Director of Compliance, and limits defendants’ right to conduct business in New York for a few years.

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/trump-decision.pdf

None of Trump's creditors filed cases or complaints against Trump in the James persecution.

 

[Robert W]

Uh, what? They renegotiated the loan and the bank took a loss. He wasn’t wiped out. He got hundreds of millions of debt wiped away.

I never said he filed for personal bankruptcy, but it’s a fact that Trump defaults on loans.

The bank was willing. So, you say the corporation was not bankrupt then?

 

[Marener]

The bank was willing. So, you say the corporation was not bankrupt then?

The bank received fraudulent information about the net worth of the business they were working with.

 

[Robert W]

The bank received fraudulent information about the net worth of the business they were working with.

If that be true, the bank messed up by not verifying all claims.

 

[Thinker101]

The bank received fraudulent information about the net worth of the business they were working with.

Yep, that must explain why the bank would be happy to work with him again.

 

[struth]

Wrong. Grand Jury establishes reasonable suspicion, not guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which is the job of trial jury.

Prosecutor Trump fired had no confidence in being able to get the later and yet you have confidence that a Trump's loyalist, who has never prosecuted anythign in her life, knows better.

Wrong a grand jury find probable cause, that’s a higher standard then mere reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is all a law enforcement agent needs to detain someone

 

[Marener]

If that be true, the bank messed up by not verifying all claims.

Sure. The bank messed up.

It’s still fraud.

 

[AntonToo]

Wrong a grand jury find probable cause, that’s a higher standard then mere reasonable suspicion. Reasonable suspicion is all a law enforcement agent needs to detain someone

Ok yes, I mixed it with probable cause but that does not change my point - it's a standard bellow establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt required to convict.

 

[struth]

Ok yes, I meant probabale cause but that does not change my point - it's a standard bellow establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Well yes it changed everything since it a completely different thing then PC

 

[AntonToo]

Well yes it changed everything since it a completely different thing then PC

No it didn't READ, because I specifically explained WHY

Either way it's a standard bellow establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

This is what I was replying to

The grand jury indicted her its slam dunk all supported by documents. Shes toast

 

[struth]

No it didn't READ, because I specifically explained WHY

Either way it's a standard bellow establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

PC is a standard higher then reasonable suspicion so yes it’s completely different

Obviously a grand jury doesn’t determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, a petit jury

 

[BackAgain]

Cops need “probable cause” to make an arrest.

A Grand Jury needs a “reasonable cause to believe” that a crime was committed and that it was committed by the defendant, in order to return an indictment. And all it requires is a quorum and the majority of the Grand Jurors to do that.

A petit (trial) jury needs “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” of the elements of a crime and the defendant’s commission of that crime, in order to convict. This requires a unanimous verdict.

Since a police officer can be mistaken and a Grand Jury can also be mistaken and even a trial jury can be mistaken, everything can also be reviewed in one or more levels of the appellate process.

 

[AntonToo]

Obviously a grand jury doesn’t determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, a petit jury

So obviously you are refuting nothing dum dum