Trump loses in NY
-
Interesting reasoning by the judge. He says it wasn't a serious crime, but fined Trump because refused to admit it.
"Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological. They are accused only of inflating asset values to make more money. The documents prove this over and over again. This is a venial sin, not a mortal sin. Defendants did not commit murder or arson. They did not rob a bank at gunpoint. Donald Trump is not Bernard Madoff. Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways," Engoron wrote.
"Defendants’ refusal to admit error — indeed, to continue it, according to the Independent Monitor — constrains this Court to conclude that they will engage in it going forward unless judicially restrained," he added.
-
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Isn't the whole point of a trial based on the defendant's refusal to accept the allegation of guilt? If not, why bother with a trial at all?
I wonder if this is a reversible error on appeal.
He'll have to post bond to appeal - in the amount of the judgment.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
Did they? In the article it says he lied about things like the square footage of property to pay less on loans and insurance.
@xenon said in Trump loses in NY:
Did they? In the article it says he lied about things like the square footage of property to pay less on loans and insurance.
I didn't see that in the article.
But any lender and insurer should have done due diligence in assessing the properties. They sure did when I applied for a HELOC and insurance.
Oh, and the fact that the judge found Michael Cohen, Michael Cohen, a credible witness...LOL.
-
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Isn't the whole point of a trial based on the defendant's refusal to accept the allegation of guilt? If not, why bother with a trial at all?
I wonder if this is a reversible error on appeal.
He'll have to post bond to appeal - in the amount of the judgment.
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
@xenon said in Trump loses in NY:
Did they? In the article it says he lied about things like the square footage of property to pay less on loans and insurance.
I didn't see that in the article.
But any lender and insurer should have done due diligence in assessing the properties. They sure did when I applied for a HELOC and insurance.
Oh, and the fact that the judge found Michael Cohen, Michael Cohen, a credible witness...LOL.
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
@xenon said in Trump loses in NY:
Did they? In the article it says he lied about things like the square footage of property to pay less on loans and insurance.
I didn't see that in the article.
But any lender and insurer should have done due diligence in assessing the properties. They sure did when I applied for a HELOC and insurance.
Oh, and the fact that the judge found Michael Cohen, Michael Cohen, a credible witness...LOL.
You're right. I read the insurance and loans thing in this article. But the square foot thing was in another.
-
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
@jon-nyc said in Trump loses in NY:
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
I mistyped. You're right of course.
Did the prosecution show who was defrauded? My understanding is that banks signed off on the loans and were repaid.
-
@jon-nyc said in Trump loses in NY:
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
I mistyped. You're right of course.
Did the prosecution show who was defrauded? My understanding is that banks signed off on the loans and were repaid.
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
@jon-nyc said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the prosecution show who was defrauded? My understanding is that banks signed off on the loans and were repaid.
Does the law require that? Does fraud require monetary loss or is the deception sufficient?
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
@jon-nyc said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the prosecution show who was defrauded? My understanding is that banks signed off on the loans and were repaid.
Does the law require that? Does fraud require monetary loss or is the deception sufficient?
Maybe this:
Fraudulent misrepresentation is a tort claim, typically arising in the field of contract law, that occurs when a defendant makes a intentional or reckless misrepresentation of fact or opinion with the intention to coerce a party into action or inaction on the basis of that misrepresentation.
-
I will reserve judgement until the banks who were either grossly negligent or a willing participant are charged as well.
@Mik said in Trump loses in NY:
I will reserve judgement until the banks who were either grossly negligent or a willing participant are charged as well.
I’d imagine Trump had a history of paying back his loans and/or the banks were duped by Trump’s golden business man reputation, which as we now know has seen a LONG trail of bankrupt Trump brands behind it and as this trial points out, a history of saying things like his penthouse was 30,000 square feet instead of the real 11,000. Or that it was worth 5x more than what it was, or with maralago, inflating its value from like 70 million to 400 million. Apparently he did this with over a dozen properties over the years…at some point, you gotta pay for the fraud.
-
@Mik said in Trump loses in NY:
I will reserve judgement until the banks who were either grossly negligent or a willing participant are charged as well.
I’d imagine Trump had a history of paying back his loans and/or the banks were duped by Trump’s golden business man reputation, which as we now know has seen a LONG trail of bankrupt Trump brands behind it and as this trial points out, a history of saying things like his penthouse was 30,000 square feet instead of the real 11,000. Or that it was worth 5x more than what it was, or with maralago, inflating its value from like 70 million to 400 million. Apparently he did this with over a dozen properties over the years…at some point, you gotta pay for the fraud.
@89th said in Trump loses in NY:
@Mik said in Trump loses in NY:
I will reserve judgement until the banks who were either grossly negligent or a willing participant are charged as well.
I’d imagine Trump had a history of paying back his loans and/or the banks were duped by Trump’s golden business man reputation, which as we now know has seen a LONG trail of bankrupt Trump brands behind it and as this trial points out, a history of saying things like his penthouse was 30,000 square feet instead of the real 11,000. Or that it was worth 5x more than what it was, or with maralago, inflating its value from like 70 million to 400 million. Apparently he did this with over a dozen properties over the years…at some point, you gotta pay for the fraud.
Not going to discuss the Penthouse, because I honestly don’t know, but Mar-A-Lago is EASILY worth $500 Million in property, alone.
I’m no Trump fan, but facts are facts.
-
Donald Trump’s tax broker was forced to admit to authorities in 2020 that Mar-a-Lago had a market value of just $27 million — not the $517 million claimed in other documents, trial evidence revealed Monday.
Trump, 77, also allegedly boasted of having a net worth of up to $5 billion — likely more than double what he really had — to land the coveted lease to a New York City golf course in 2010, according to documents.
-
89th, look at the properties surrounding Mar-A-Lago -
$45 Million, $50 Million, $25 Million… and these are properties that aren’t on the ocean front. And aren’t 1/30th the size.
$500 Million is probably undervalued.
-
One caveat is that Mar-a-lago is unique. It's zoned as a social club, not a residential plot (which I'm assuming the other properties are).
When Trump was in financial trouble in the 90's, he tried to get the town to rezone it to residential plots but they refused. They did agree to let him rezone the hotel to a social club.
So - it's a unique property. His brand has to factor into the value somehow. But no comps on it really as it is zoned.
From what I read - Trump's rationale for the high appraisal is the uniqueness (I think he compared it to the Mona Lisa).
I don't really know how you objectively appraise something like this, TBH....
-
One caveat is that Mar-a-lago is unique. It's zoned as a social club, not a residential plot (which I'm assuming the other properties are).
When Trump was in financial trouble in the 90's, he tried to get the town to rezone it to residential plots but they refused. They did agree to let him rezone the hotel to a social club.
So - it's a unique property. His brand has to factor into the value somehow. But no comps on it really as it is zoned.
From what I read - Trump's rationale for the high appraisal is the uniqueness (I think he compared it to the Mona Lisa).
I don't really know how you objectively appraise something like this, TBH....
@xenon said in Trump loses in NY:
One caveat is that Mar-a-lago is unique. It's zoned as a social club, not a residential plot (which I'm assuming the other properties are).
When Trump was in financial trouble in the 90's, he tried to get the town to rezone it to residential plots but they refused. They did agree to let him rezone the hotel to a social club.
So - it's a unique property. His brand has to factor into the value somehow. But no comps on it really as it is zoned.
From what I read - Trump's rationale for the high appraisal is the uniqueness (I think he compared it to the Mona Lisa).
I don't really know how you objectively appraise something like this, TBH....
Consider the fact that it’s probably the proximity to Mar-A-Lago that raises the property values of the residential properties around it… But $500 Million? Easy.
-
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
@jon-nyc said in Trump loses in NY:
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
You mean the " Get Trump" law? The one that was specifically passed to prosecute him and sunsets in the next year or so?
You do realize, the Special Prosecutor and his charges, the New York stuff and the Atlanta case were all filed withing six months of Trump announcing he was running? And if I'm not mistaken, every prosecutor has talked with the Biden Whitehouse.
-
@jon-nyc said in Trump loses in NY:
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
You mean the " Get Trump" law? The one that was specifically passed to prosecute him and sunsets in the next year or so?
You do realize, the Special Prosecutor and his charges, the New York stuff and the Atlanta case were all filed withing six months of Trump announcing he was running? And if I'm not mistaken, every prosecutor has talked with the Biden Whitehouse.
@Jolly said in Trump loses in NY:
@jon-nyc said in Trump loses in NY:
@George-K said in Trump loses in NY:
Did the judge actually show how they defrauded anyone?
Does the law require that? Are judges supposed to show fraud? What’s the prosecutor supposed to do?
You mean the " Get Trump" law? The one that was specifically passed to prosecute him and sunsets in the next year or so?
They must have decided to “get Trump” when he was 8.
The $355 million penalty that a New York judge ordered Donald J. Trump to pay in his civil fraud trial might seem steep in a case with no victim calling for redress and no star witness pointing the finger at Mr. Trump. But a little-known 70-year-old state law made the punishment possible.
The law, often referred to by its shorthand, 63(12), which stems from its place in New York’s rule book, is a regulatory bazooka for the state’s attorney general, Letitia James. Her office has used it to aim at a wide range of corporate giants: the oil company Exxon Mobil, the tobacco brand Juul and the pharma executive Martin Shkreli.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy
