Donald the Orange and Family Sued in NY

[DeplorableInfidel]

NY law is as I

Another pointless comment.

So the answer to the question of whether or not you have any sort of legal background to base your claims upon is...

Nope.

The answer is again: not your concern. You’re free to construe that or misconstrue it any way you wish. But the value of my position isn’t going to be found in the realm of my credentials. For, like it or not, my position is either mainly correct and logical or it’s not.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Another pointless comment.

Maybe we're just trying to make you feel at home.

Take a stab responding to post #338.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

I’m saying that there’s not a scintilla of evidence that they made any false entry of any kind at all.

So the size of the property is correct?

An unimportant question. Let’s say that the size of one unit is misstated. Ok. And? Is it your contention that the lender relied on this statement without bothering to try to verify it? And that one factual “misstatement” (if it was one) turns out to have been the lynchpin in the lender’s decision to offer a loan?

Fr that to be true and to make any sense would require you to accept the proposition that the lender had no obligation whatsoever to engage in due diligence. Too bad for you that the law disagrees with your position.

Trial Document: Trump Acknowledged Penthouse Size at 11,000 Square Feet, not 30,000 He Later Claimed

Donald Trump signed a document 30 years ago that gave the true size of his New York penthouse that was later listed as far larger on his financial statements, according to evidence shown Tuesday at the former president's civil business fraud trial. The evidence appeared in an email attachment...

www.voanews.com

Again. So what?

The evidence appeared in an email attachment shown as Allen Weisselberg, the former finance chief of Trump's company, testified in New York Attorney General Letitia James' fraud lawsuit against Trump and his Trump Organization. Trump denies any wrongdoing.

The attachment was a 1994 document, signed by Trump, that pegged his Trump Tower triplex at 10,996 square feet — not the 30,000 square feet later claimed for years on financial statements that were given to banks, insurers and others to make deals and secure loans.

All of which still amounts to nothing unless your claim is that the duty of the plaintiff (actually, in this case, the supposedly injured party) to conduct due diligence can be dispensed with. So, let me say it again:

Detrimental reliance. And yet, not one lender even complained. And not one lender lost a single red cent of principle or interest.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

Another pointless comment.

Maybe we're just trying to make you feel at home.

Take a stab responding to post #338.

Or maybe you’re simply offering static to compensate for your inability to intelligently or meaningfully reply to the things I’ve pointed out.

 

[DeplorableInfidel]

This is the thing with Trump apologists. They're a lot like creationists trying to sound sciency.
This week they're trying to sound lawyerly.
The bottom line is that the truth doesn't matter to them. If Trump had the truth on his side he wouldn't need so many misinformed, propaganda-soaked minions trying to excuse him, he'd get to court, prove his innocence and get exonerated. Today.
Why can't Trumpers figure that out? I think THEY DON'T CARE.
Trump knows he's guilty, and that's why delay is his ONLY tactic.
It's his good fortune that time didn't run out on one of the four criminal cases first.

Juries are not political. Juries have the last word and they're made up of people, regular people, including trumpers.

If Cheato thought even ONE out of TWELVE jurors could withstand being exposed to the evidence and still vote to acquit, he'd be begging for a speedy trial.

Could you fucking imagine the crowing if he were to prevail?

If he were to prevail on even one out of 91 felony counts for which juries have already found him likely guilty?
One acquitted or dismissed charge and it would become his new campaign platform, nft trading card, sneaker logo and Truth Social trademark. And it would seal the election for him.

But he knows how long those odds are: he is guilty as sin on ALL those counts on which juries have already found him likely guilty. He knows it, and his biggest fear is losing the election because winning or stealing it are his only hopes for staying out of prison. Abolishing the government that threatens to hold him accountable is the only plan he has left. So he is on an insane slash and burn campaign, and as several of us have been saying for years, he will burn this country down before he gives up power.
Very unAmerican.

And guess what, @DeplorableInfidel ?
That asshole doesn't care two shits about you or me or anyone else but Donald J Trump.
There is not one person who knows him who likes him.
Not even his wife.
Not even his daughter.
Not even a dog.

Why people demean themselves by flaunting their ignorance in defense of that piece of human detritus, is beyond me.

A decidedly meaningless post.

I frankly couldn’t give a rat’s ass about your feelings, opinions and beliefs regarding President Trump. I don’t buy what you’re peddling and you don’t support your claims anyway.

Why you demean yourself by attempting to denigrate Trump is a bigger mystery.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I’m saying that there’s not a scintilla of evidence that they made any false entry of any kind at all.

So the size of the property is correct?

An unimportant question.

No, it's important. If it is incorrect, then your claim of no false entries is incorrect. Moreover, it's a falsified business record according to the very statute you posted.

Let’s say that the size of one unit is misstated.

You mean exaggerated by 3x. 11k sq ft is not 30k sq ft. It's misstated by enormous margins.

Ok. And? Is it your contention that the lender relied on this statement without bothering to try to verify it?

Now THAT is an unimportant question. It in no way vindicates a falsified business record.

And that one factual “misstatement” (if it was one)

It is.

turns out to have been the lynchpin in the lender’s decision to offer a loan?

Who knows. But that's another unimportant question. HOWEVER, IF you take that falsified business record in concert with the other false (exaggerated) valuations, then a pattern emerges of inflations. By coincidence, all misstatements ought not be inflated numbers. So it's a pattern of exaggeration, i.e. falsification of business records. They're unimportant that they show intent in totality and are a lynchpin in totality because they are beyond coincidence. BUT they are unimportant because the single issue of the one size exaggeration trivially disproves your claim and proves a falsified business record.

Fr that to be true and to make any sense would require you to accept the proposition that the lender had no obligation whatsoever to engage in due diligence. Too bad for you that the law disagrees with your position.

That point is irrelevant. While it would be weird for a banker to go to the penthouse with a measuring tape to be due diligence, due diligence itself is a red herring that obfuscates your disproved claim and how it connects to the statutory definitions you previously posted. The documented, exaggerated size of the penthouse along with other exaggerations led to a final exaggerated valuation. Whether the bank was diligent in looking at it or took the papers and wiped their fat rich asses with them is irrelevant to the trivially demonstrated fact of exaggerated data.

Trial Document: Trump Acknowledged Penthouse Size at 11,000 Square Feet, not 30,000 He Later Claimed

Donald Trump signed a document 30 years ago that gave the true size of his New York penthouse that was later listed as far larger on his financial statements, according to evidence shown Tuesday at the former president's civil business fraud trial. The evidence appeared in an email attachment...

www.voanews.com

Again. So what?

Already answered: you claimed "there’s not a scintilla of evidence that they made any false entry of any kind at all." You were wrong because the size was exaggerated.

The evidence appeared in an email attachment shown as Allen Weisselberg, the former finance chief of Trump's company, testified in New York Attorney General Letitia James' fraud lawsuit against Trump and his Trump Organization. Trump denies any wrongdoing.

The attachment was a 1994 document, signed by Trump, that pegged his Trump Tower triplex at 10,996 square feet — not the 30,000 square feet later claimed for years on financial statements that were given to banks, insurers and others to make deals and secure loans.

All of which still amounts to nothing unless your claim is that the duty of the plaintiff (actually, in this case, the supposedly injured party) to conduct due diligence can be dispensed with. So, let me say it again:

Detrimental reliance. And yet, not one lender even complained. And not one lender lost a single red cent of principle or interest.

That's another unimportant point. In theory, banks could have lost money. They incurred undue risk. There are many scammers who get lucky. But it's not relevant. You already posted the statute.

 

[Elixir]

That's another unimportant point. In theory, banks could have lost money. They incurred undue risk. There are many scammers who get lucky. But it's not relevant. You already posted the statute.

Don, I hate to say it. But this mini trump is never going to run out of ketchup.

not one lender even complained. And not one lender lost a single red cent of principle or interest.

So what?
What about Bob?
Je Suis Bob!!

 

[Worldtraveller]

NY law is as I

Another pointless comment.

So the answer to the question of whether or not you have any sort of legal background to base your claims upon is...

Nope.

The answer is again: not your concern. You’re free to construe that or misconstrue it any way you wish. But the value of my position isn’t going to be found in the realm of my credentials. For, like it or not, my position is either mainly correct and logical or it’s not.

Narrator: It's not.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

What colour is the sky on your planet?

He’s referring to April 14th, 1968. That was the last time Hair Furor didn’t do anything illegal, unethical or wrong.

No. I’m sure President Trump has made mistakes. Like all of us mere humans, mistakes and so forth are inevitable. But I bet you knew that’s not what I was alluding to.

Here’s a fun fact. One can be accused of a crime or crimes and yet not be guilty. I know, right? Astounding.

True, but some of the charges are basically slam dunk cases. And I can't think of anyone who has faced so many separate charges that wasn't guilty. And so far his defense in court has been abysmal.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Put it simply: no victim; no fraud. A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception. But even in the darkest light, if there is no victim, there is no fraud.

Trump over valued for banks and under valued for taxing authorities. The people of New York were certainly victims of his fraud.

Nope. The people of NY were not victims of any such thing. Valuations tend to be largely subjective, anyway. Even a formal appraisal is not compelling evidence of “value.” Just consider how the judge himself failed to grasp the actual value of Mar A Lago.

So having two different valuations for the exact same property is A-Okay with you? High valuations to banks, low valuations to taxing authorities. Both money for team Trump.

A valuation of what you maintain a piece of property is worth for one purpose has to be distinguished from some other valuation addressing other issues.

No.

Again, if the village tax assessor claims my abode is worth only “X” for purposes taxation, that doesn’t mean that I’m only able to offer it for sale at that price. And if I am seeking a loan based on my own estimate of what the property is actually worth, I can make use of my own estimation of that value in my an loan application

Except you can't. Your estimate of it's value has no bearing on what the bank will loan you. The bank will ask it's appraiser to come up with a value.

And note that if you sell a property in an arms-length transaction the sales price typically is used to set the new appraisal amount (in many jurisdictions the appraised value is some fixed % of the real value, so the number aren't equal.)

In short, yes. The same property can be valued differently depending on the purpose of the respective valuations. Lying isn’t permitted. But valuation addressing different issues are allowed to vary.

No. The value of something not often traded is imprecise so it is not considered wrongdoing for there to be disagreements. However, there should be one value. And, likewise, minor variations in details sometimes happen (I've seen an incorrect square footage for our house that looked like they double-counted the stairs as they are on both floors) but 10,000 ft^2 vs 30,000 ft^2 is inexcusable.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But wait! There’s more!

Bragg appears to have included different “instruments” (ie, different allegedly false business records) — and based on the People’s response to the Trump lawyers’ Request for a Bill of Particulars — the prosecution has different “theories” concerning which other laws Trump supposedly intended to commit.

This particular post is already too lengthy.
Cannot be helped. So, it will have to be continued in one or more additional posts. Sorry. It will have to wait. I’m heading out now. But I will add this much before I return to continue this response:

The DA seems to rely on (among other things) an alleged “intent” to commit or conceal some Federal Election Law offense. Among other objections to the Bragg indictment, it is dubious that NY State even has jurisdiction over a Federal offense.

See anything in that description that requires that the other law being broken is one that the state can prosecute?

And so what if there are different theories about different acts? There are many other illegal acts, they are just going after the easiest to prove: that he falsified the business records. This is common--that the attempt to cover up a crime ends up being a far bigger issue than the crime itself.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But wait! There’s more!

Bragg appears to have included different “instruments” (ie, different allegedly false business records) — and based on the People’s response to the Trump lawyers’ Request for a Bill of Particulars — the prosecution has different “theories” concerning which other laws Trump supposedly intended to commit.

This particular post is already too lengthy.
Cannot be helped. So, it will have to be continued in one or more additional posts. Sorry. It will have to wait. I’m heading out now. But I will add this much before I return to continue this response:

The DA seems to rely on (among other things) an alleged “intent” to commit or conceal some Federal Election Law offense. Among other objections to the Bragg indictment, it is dubious that NY State even has jurisdiction over a Federal offense.

They created a false entry for inflated size of property which was then used to inflate its valuation. Are you saying that is only a 2nd degree felony, not a 1st?

I think he's saying that because there wasn't a conviction about the underlying offense that the record alteration can only be second degree.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I’m saying that there’s not a scintilla of evidence that they made any false entry of any kind at all.

Then why didn't he try to prove that at trial?

(Hint: What happens is the Republicans make all sorts of claims about what they will prove in court--but when it reaches the courtroom those claims are nowhere to be seen because they're under oath.)

 

[Ford]

NY law is as I

Another pointless comment.

So the answer to the question of whether or not you have any sort of legal background to base your claims upon is...

Nope.

The answer is again: not your concern. You’re free to construe that or misconstrue it any way you wish. But the value of my position isn’t going to be found in the realm of my credentials. For, like it or not, my position is either mainly correct and logical or it’s not.

So your position, then, is not based on any legal expertise on your part, and only upon your feeling that Trump did nothing wrong....mostly because you believe him when he says as much.

Well Trump had attorneys - of questionable quality but at least they passed the bar in NY - defending him in the fraud trial. As they are attorneys licensed to practice in that state, it follows that they know more about the law than you do. They have a staff presumably better educated in the law than you. In addition, Trump is surrounded by attorneys - again, of questionable quality - that are there to give him legal advice.

He lost. He was found liable for fraud. The best attorneys he could get could not win the case. As such, YOUR opinion is meaningless. You are free to whine and complain all you want, but as a legal matter (appeals notwithstanding), it is settled. Trump committed massive fraud.

To put it simply, you're wrong.

 

[Ford]

Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.

What colour is the sky on your planet?

He’s referring to April 14th, 1968. That was the last time Hair Furor didn’t do anything illegal, unethical or wrong.

No. I’m sure President Trump has made mistakes. Like all of us mere humans, mistakes and so forth are inevitable. But I bet you knew that’s not what I was alluding to.

Here’s a fun fact. One can be accused of a crime or crimes and yet not be guilty. I know, right? Astounding.

True, but some of the charges are basically slam dunk cases. And I can't think of anyone who has faced so many separate charges that wasn't guilty. And so far his defense in court has been abysmal.

In addition, prosecutors are often loathe to bring a case to trial unless they are certain of a conviction. Federal prosecutors even less so...which is why they have north of a 96% conviction rate. With these cases being about the former president and guaranteed to be under overwhelming scrutiny, we can rest assured that Jack Smith knows he has Trump dead to rights. That's why Trump wants his pet judge Cannon to keep delaying the case. He thinks he's going to win the election and be able to make it go away somehow.

As others have said, if he is so convinced of his innocence, he should want these matters settled with all possible speed so he can keep campaigning. Yet he delays. Because he knows the only way out is to become President again and use his power to exonerate himself. Whether that can actually happen is not settled law, but that's all he's got...because he knows he's guilty. Just like he knew the election wasn't "stollen."

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I’m saying that there’s not a scintilla of evidence that they made any false entry of any kind at all.

Then why didn't he try to prove that at trial?

(Hint: What happens is the Republicans make all sorts of claims about what they will prove in court--but when it reaches the courtroom those claims are nowhere to be seen because they're under oath.)

I am getting sick and tired of people shilling for Trump on legal arguments he and his lawyers never used. He defaulted to guilty in this case. His lawyers effectively made no effort to disprove the claims against him. The defense (in the penalty phase) became, 'so what?'

So arguments to defend Trump from accusations of wrong doing are peculiar when his lawyers didn't even bother making those arguments... and in their case (unlike in a web board), not making those arguments created a massive liability of huge fines.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Since this is the Internets--remember, it's kinda like tubes--we can pretty much say whatever we want. So with that... if I were his lawyers, I'd go for the insanity defense.

I mean think about it. It's common knowledge he has narcissist personality disorder. Wouldn't someone like that be expected to hallucinate things about themselves?

Evidence for the defense:

• He said he has big hands and no problems downstairs. Eyewitness testimony: it's actually shaped like a mushroom.
• He said he had the biggest crowd. Photos: below average size crowds.
• He says he makes perfect phone calls. Transcripts: show he does shakedowns in the middle of illogically constructed arguments.
• Thinks he's in superhuman shape. Photos: he's out of shape and paints himself orange.
• Thinks he's the Chosen One. ...etc

Defense Closing Argument: So is it any wonder this incompetent orange menace would imagine his penthouse was the biggest in the world, exaggerating size by 3x?

Your Honor, Mr. Half-a-Basket is right. This is the banks' fault. While my client clearly falsified records over and over, which is illegal, they should have never taken him seriously. I mean, look at him. You should throw this clown out of court, but don't hold him to account. His brain doesn't work right.

 

[Elixir]

He lost. He was found liable for fraud. The best attorneys he could get could not win the case. As such, YOUR opinion is meaningless. You are free to whine and complain all you want, but as a legal matter (appeals notwithstanding), it is settled. Trump committed massive fraud.

Appeals truly notwithstanding. It is not a remote possibility that the judgment could be reduced, but there is little to no chance that the findings of fact (e.g. Trump is a fraud) will be overturned. Appellate courts generally don’t do that unless there was some massive misrepresentation of the facts, which are not even at issue here. Not even Trump’s inflatable lawyer is asserting any such thing.

 

[Elixir]

So arguments to defend Trump from accusations of wrong doing are peculiar when his lawyers didn't even bother making those arguments... and in their case (unlike in a web board), not making those arguments created a massive liability of huge fines.

Look, this trumper is no different from the others. He’s not a drooling idiot. He is not raising a legal defense of Trump’s crimes, he is trying to indict the process that is about to put the object of his idolatry away, probably for life.
It doesn’t matter how guilty Trump is.
It doesn’t matter who he has harmed, it doesn’t matter how many people died, it doesn’t matter what judges are running his trial, and it doesn’t even matter if he is found guilty on all 91 felony counts.

It only matters if he or one of his sycophants doesn’t win or steal the election this fall.

So we have shills like this Deplo showing up trying to sow doubt, employing the usual Republican “baffle ‘em with bullshit” tactic in the vain hope that he will find some kind of fence sitters here that he can convert to The Cause by sounding lawyerish. He’s not concerned with the truth.

 

[Patooka]

I've got a sneaking suspicion that if Brandon committed fraud in the manner Trump did, Deplorableinfidel would be marching in the street with his pitchfork in less time than it would take to describe it. I just have that feeling for some reason...