Trump civil fraud trial begins today

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tonelover
  • Start date Start date
Tonelover said:
This should be more fun than a barrel full of monkeys. Let the facts be known so supporters can see what a sleaze he is and still bend over backwards to defend him.. It it weren't for the statute of limitations they would have to cover the time from the day he was born to now being that his whole life is a fraud.
Click to expand...
a177ba7069d280b5d31b636e66e2f1dc8b80d6481f932215a8e729132dee5e0b.jpg
 
Jeez, thinking about this a bit different, the Mar-a-Lago property is one bad flooding away from being worth squat. A direct hit from a hurricane or a wave from an off-shore earthquake and that entire strip of land could be literally uninhabitable. Based on the last 10 years of Mother Nature I wouldn't buy the place.

1696265849912.png
 
Baked Bean said:
Jeez, thinking about this a bit different, the Mar-a-Lago property is one bad flooding away from being worth squat. A direct hit from a hurricane or a wave from an off-shore earthquake and that entire strip of land could be literally uninhabitable. Based on the last 10 years of Mother Nature I wouldn't buy the place.

View attachment 253466
Click to expand...
You could literally say that about any home on a body of water anywhere and it would hold true to some extent. Also, flooding is fairly common place on a lot of older beach homes in FL that aren't built to the new code where living quarters have to be a story off the ground. I worked near a 50's-60's eta hotel that had been flooded at least a half a dozen times on the ground floor during high tides and storm surges. Kinda the price you pay being a few steps from the water. A lot of the state is under 10 feet above sea level so there is that. Some of the inland bodies of water also have flooded during hurricanes. Lake Panasoffkee and the Sewannee for example.
 
During opening arguments the prosecution maintains that the Trump organization saved well over $100 million in interest payments over the multiple years of committing real estate fraud. :oops: Everyone understands that some of that came out of each of our wallets, right? Reports are the one time that Trump and James made solid eye contact he sneered at her and she just smiled back. :ROFLMAO: Everyone remember when Trump threw Michael Cohen under the bus - he said at the time to look into Donald's real estate dealings because he was doing EXACTLY what he was found guilty of last week. He who laughs last laughs best indeed.
 
Did I just hear that the Judge threw out all of the 'points of interest' that may have occurred prior to 2014? 80% of the points of interest?
 
311splawndude said:
Did I just hear that the Judge threw out all of the 'points of interest' that may have occurred prior to 2014? 80% of the points of interest?
Click to expand...

Just snooped around for a few minutes and found no headlines relating to this. Big takeaways from Day 1 are the judge ain't falling for any of the stupid arguments presented so far - basically, 1) real estate fraud is just how it goes in NYC, and 2) it was up to Mazars to clean up Trump's massive math errors. And this trial is going to last forever. We're talking the biggest tax audit in history taking place in a courtroom where literally thousands of transactions might be disputed line by line. Lastly, we can expect to see a lot of different Trumps take the witness stand.
 
Baked Bean said:
During opening arguments the prosecution maintains that the Trump organization saved well over $100 million in interest payments over the multiple years of committing real estate fraud. :oops: Everyone understands that some of that came out of each of our wallets, right?
Click to expand...
huh?
 
Baked Bean said:
The cost of corporate fraud trickles down to just about every good and service.
Click to expand...
Explain how this works in this case. He didn't steal anything. As far as I understand, the charge is that asset values were inflated for collateral purposes. That's really the banks discretion — theoretically they could have made the loan without any collateral. Furthermore, the judge conceded that no one, including the state of NY, was harmed.
 
HOLY SMOKES. The Supreme just voted to refuse to hear John Eastman's appeal. AND Clarence Thomas recused himself from the decision. :oops: Pretty sure all of the other 18 defendants and their attorneys were eagerly awaiting the opposite outcome. Eastman, being the first to appeal all the way to the top, and then being denied with Thomas out of it is about as a bad a news those folks can get.
42009a81-2bfb-4288-9ca3-fa262790fedc_text.gif
 
denialist said:
Explain how this works in this case. He didn't steal anything. As far as I understand, the charge is that asset values were inflated for collateral purposes. That's really the banks discretion — theoretically they could have made the loan without any collateral. Furthermore, the judge admitted that no one, including the state of NY, was harmed.
Click to expand...

Nice cherry topping. Here's how it works. You buy a skyscraper for $400 million. Come tax time you say it's in bad dis-repair, needs lots of work, and for tax purposes should only be valued at $250 million. Six months later you need a massive loan and want the very best interest and payment terms available which requires giving the bank a LOT of high dollar collateral. You list a bunch of line items including the skyscraper, but value it at $600 million. Between the tax savings and interest reductions you save millions. That is illegal for what should be very obvious reasons.
 
Baked Bean said:
Nice cherry topping. Here's how it works. You buy a skyscraper for $400 million. Come tax time you say it's in bad dis-repair, needs lots of work, and for tax purposes should only be valued at $250 million. Six months later you need a massive loan and want the very best interest and payment terms available which requires giving the bank a LOT of high dollar collateral. You list a bunch of line items including the skyscraper, but value it at $600 million. Between the tax savings and interest reductions you save millions. That is illegal for what should be very obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
WTF is cherry topping? ...I'm not even sure that contradictory valuations depending on context are illegal. Regardless, this isn't a tax case. it's the banks responsibility to value the collateral, right? Why do you think they require an independent appraiser when you get a home loan? You think they just trust what you say, or Trump for that matter? Even if they did, did he default? So again, the argument that "We're" paying for something is silly in this case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top