Trump Indictment Watch
- Thread starter cajunrevenge
- Start date
Holy ****. Seriously, you do not have a clue to what you're talking about. I showed you the statement above that shows I'm right. You will never figure the media is playing you for a chump in all of this.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
It's right here. I get the picture that you're hearing a lot of bull**** that isn't true. You still can't seem to figure out the banks and Trump determine value, not some idiot on the bench.
What legal filing is that from? This correction was AFTER Forbes notified them and emails from within the company show resistance to correcting the number and the square footage was correct in documents pre-dating these loan applications. They only "self reported" after getting called out on it by Forbes. That still leaves years of fradulent claims. If it was only this one issue I would say give him the benefit of the doubt but its not just his apartment. And as I said Trump, a veteran real estate developer who claims to have one of the greatest memories in history forgetting the square footage of his own apartment is a hard pill to swallow. If you want to tell me Trump is a moron without an extraordinary memory I would buy it, but thats not what Trump says and its not the argument he is making in court. I would bet even a mediocre real estate agent could tell the difference between 10,000 square feet and 30,000 square feet in a matter of minutes evaluating an apartment. And this isnt a property Trump just visited once or twice this is his literal home. I am no real estate developer but I could recall the square footage of homes I lived in 30 years ago within atleast a couple hundred square feet.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Oh good lord we are back to "well if its illegal why isnt he charged with a crime". Like that makes any difference to you. The AG has made a criminal referral and DA Alvin Bragg has said the investigation is ongoing. The previous DA and two prosecutors on the case who resigned have said they believe there is more than enough for a criminal indictment. The budgen of proof is significantly higher in a criminal case. I dont think you should rule out potential criminal charges once this civil trial is over.
I'm just using the same logic you always use. It is amazing how you can't stay consistent from page to page on here.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
The prosecution when questioning Weaselberg showed him an email from September 19, 2016 from Forbes about the incorrect square footage.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
You are using gaslighting not logic. I will use whatever logic you want as long as its applied consistently. The difference between us is I accept the court verdicts even if I have some disagreement with it. You only accept court verdicts that affirm your opinion, which rarely if ever happens.
Cool. Then Trump's people corrected it without coercion when they were told that by Forbes. The fact is that's the only property from Trump with a square footage problem so it probably was a mistake. You might have a point if there were several of these square footage problems but there isn't. As I said the bank has a duty to check on it themselves. Trump even has a disclaimer that everything they do are their own estimates and than lender should check everything out for themselves.
Last edited:
Not true. I only state my opinion when I'm sure I'm right. I *think* Trump has presidential immunity but I can't be sure so I'll accept whatever the decision is made by the courts. However, I won't accept nonsense from the courts when they try to tell me the sky is purple when i know it isn't.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
All of these cases will be appealed umpteen times to the highest courts. If you want to maintain that lower courts will eventually be overturned thats fine. When its all said and done I will accept the verdicts regardless of outcome. I might express some disagreement but I will accept the verdict as the factual conclusion to the issue. Do you pledge to do the same? If theres no goalpost you will even set to accept that you are wrong why should I accept court verdicts that say I was wrong? No point in arguing any of this if you made up your mind long before the trials that you will only accept verdicts that affirm your beliefs.
Let's get away from the stupid idea that Trump is inflating property value to get loans. First of all Trump' "inflation" of his properties values would not change getting loans because Trump has an excellent track record of paying back these loans and the Trump Brand. Also, these inflated prices would make his taxes go up significantly so it's not worth artificially inflating anything.
Last edited:
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Even if that is accepted it wouldnt get Trump off the hook for all the other properties he purposely overvalued. The disclaimer is as worthless. You cant absolve yourself of guilt for lying on a form you are legally obligated to atleast attempt to be accurate. The bank has no legal obligation to double check Trumps disclosures. Trump however does have a legal obligation to atleast attempt to give an accurate disclosure. The bank actually applied what they called a haircut to Trumps numbers because some of them were outright ridiculous. What Trumps disclosure said and what the bank estimated his worth at were two completely different numbers. Theres nothing the bank can do or not do that absolves Trump for lying on his financial disclosures.
I accept verdicts that follow law and not activism from the courts.
Last edited:
You still can't figure out that the banks agree with his assessments. It's not the government's responsibility to determine value. As a libertarian you should understand that part. Yes, the Trump brand has significant value regardless of what you believe.
I had a property that went from around $10K to a little over $100K to now $75K. What's the true evaluation?
Last edited:
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
It absolutely would have changed the loans. DB required he maintained a net worth of 2.5 billion. Trump claimed to be worth 4 billion. A reasonable estimate at the time put him at around 1.6 billion. And are you seriously not aware of Trumps history regarding loans? He defaulted on his 640 million dollar loan from DB for his Chicago tower and tried suing them to not have to pay them. They gave him an extended grace period and ended up forgiving hundres of millions of dollars in loans........ and then they lent him MORE money. People have been wonder wtf DB was thinking giving him loans when virtually no other bank would lend him money because of his history. Probably has nothing to do with all that money DB was caught laundering for Russia. DB literally loaned Trump money once so he could use it to pay back another loan from DB he was defaulting on.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
The banks absolutely did not agree with his assessment. They even called it the "Trump haircut" when they used their own assessment to try and nail down his real net worth. For example in 2011 Trump claimed to be worth 4.2 billion and DB has him pegged as worth 2.3 billion in their internal documents.
The government isnt determining value they are using the valuation of similar assets sold in the free market. Theres over valuing your assets and then theres tripling your assets. Trumps brand is meaningless because Trump includes for most of his properties a citation noting that he did not include his brand value. He kind of double dips by including the perceived brand value and then states in the same disclosure that the property is actually worth more than he is listing because of his brand value. If you hade your property appraised and they said its worth 100k and you file for a long that same year claiming that land is worth 300k you are committing fraud. If this was just a slight exaggeration there would be no case.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
And by activistim from the courts you mean anything you disagree with. You really going to claim that every single court case Trump loses even after he loses each in multiple rounds of appeals is due to an activist Judge? Really?
My point stands because even without the "inflated" value they still loaned him the money, didn't they? Why did they loan him the money even though he wasn't at the 2.5 billion threshold? You know why? Because they know how subjective all of this really is. Just because their assessment is different than Trump's own doesn't make either one right or wrong. I can go along with the idea his brand isn't as valuable as he thinks it is because I don't know either way but it's not the courts' business to decide.
According to this judge if I had assessed that property I discussed earlier at 100K while they valued it at 10k I committed fraud at that exact time. See how stupid all of this is? It's too subjective.
Last edited:
With this case I definitely will. Nearly anybody who deals with real estate will tell you this stuff is too subjective to pin down and the free market rules it, not the courts.
Last edited: