Trump Indictment Watch

Tapate50 said:
NYT op ed the other day discussed if this was going too far... Every real estate person in the world could be under indictment if this is the standard they use.
Click to expand...


If they are lying on financial disclosures that their properties are triple the size they really are to get lower rated on their loans then they should be going to prison.
 
They didnt get paid in full because the rates would have been higher because they would have viewed it as a higher risk. So no, they didnt get paid in full and thats what this is about. It wasnt a mistake listing properties as 3x the actual size. Trump wouldnt have bothered with it if there wasnt some benefit to him.
 
cajunrevenge said:
They didnt get paid in full because the rates would have been higher because they would have viewed it as a higher risk. So no, they didnt get paid in full and thats what this is about. It wasnt a mistake listing properties as 3x the actual size. Trump wouldnt have bothered with it if there wasnt some benefit to him.
Click to expand...

No they wouldn't have - You literally have no clue how any of this works. Trump was extremely credit worth and the primary driver of rates would be DCF analysis from the revenues generated.

But man - Those poor banks!

This is what the idiotic anti-trump left has come to.
 
cajunrevenge said:
If they are lying on financial disclosures that their properties are triple the size they really are to get lower rated on their loans then they should be going to prison.
Click to expand...

Once again this was corrected by the organization in 2017 on their own. If they were doing this on purpose you would see multiple instances of this and there doesn't seem to be any. You still can't seem to figure out why they couldn't go after Trump in the criminal courts and had to do this civil BS.
 
cajunrevenge said:
They didnt get paid in full because the rates would have been higher because they would have viewed it as a higher risk. So no, they didnt get paid in full and thats what this is about. It wasnt a mistake listing properties as 3x the actual size. Trump wouldnt have bothered with it if there wasnt some benefit to him.
Click to expand...

In no scenario was MaL worth 18M.

None.

You continue to show zero intuition into finance.
 
Just as Michael Cohen said he would, Trump drops lawsuit against him because he fears being forced to testify. MC should counter sue to get back his lawyer fees.
 
Tapate50 said:
In no scenario was MaL worth 18M.

None.

You continue to show zero intuition into finance.
Click to expand...


And you continue to react without actual context. The Judge just cited the tax assessors value of 18-27 million. The point is that Trump massively over listed the value of his properties to expand his net worth by 2.5 billion to get more favorable loan conditions. Maralago could have been worth 100 million or even 200 million. It wasnt anywhere close to the 491-600 million Trump listed it at over the years. If it was just Maralago you could argue thats a mistaken over optimistic valuation. If it was one property it wouldnt increase his net worth enough to make a difference. Problem is it was all his properties. He cant argue that he was just being overly optimistic when he listed his 11,000 square foot building as being 30,000 square feet.
 
Cant we get you in touch with Trumps lawyers. Your brilliant legal theories will get this case thrown out in no time.
 
Last edited:
From what I understand you can't use brand value in these financial disclosures and Trump tried to insert his perceived brand value into his properties. The top end of what I have seen Maralagos value estimated at is 300 million and that's today's valuation. He listed it at 491 million 12 years ago and went up from there. The land would actually be worth more if a new owner could tear down Maralago and put houses there but the property is restricted to only being a social club because Trump agrees to that condition for a tax break. Legally he can't use Maralago as a residence but listed it as his home to vote in Florida. I was surprised to find out revenue went down at Maralago during Trump's term. A lot of people canceled and stopped using it because of Trump but most of it was made up for by SS, bribes from lobbyists, politicians trying to curry favor with Trump, and Trumps own campaign events. So if Trump sells and the old customers don't return it might actually be going down in value
 
4t3ywf.jpg
 
I like how we have gone from "Trumps a billionaire so he isnt beholden to anyone because he can just pay for his campaign himself" to "Its unfair that Trump is having to use all his campaign money to defend himself from lawsuits and criminal charges".
 
Jack Smith has asked the Judge to force Trump to disclose whether he plans to use the "advice of council" defense in court based on his using that defense in public statements. If Trump does plan on using that defense then he waives attorney client privilege and prosecutors can subpoena Trumps lawyers communications. If Trump were to use that defense it would cause a delay in the trial because prosecutors would need to subpoena their communications as it becomes evidence in the case so the Judge will likely rule that Trump has to disclose it now so they dont have to stop mid trial to examine new evidence. I think Trump will decline to use the defense in court but will continue using it in public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top