Discussion:
Hochul exposes the rot
(too old to reply)
ScottW
2024-02-20 17:31:34 UTC
Permalink
Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry about — that this only applied to Trump.

Turley replies...that's the real problem.

ScottW
mINE109
2024-02-20 18:47:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by ScottW
Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry about — that this only applied to Trump.
Turley replies...that's the real problem.
Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.

Another famous case of "fraudulently billed ... business expenses":

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/

Leona Helmsley.
mINE109
2024-02-20 18:59:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by mINE109
Post by ScottW
Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry
about — that this only applied to Trump.
Turley replies...that's the real problem.
Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/
Leona Helmsley.
Bing can be helpful.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/10/17/trump-keeps-attacking-this-statute-in-ny-fraud-case-heres-why-his-claims-lack-merit/


SURPRISING FACT

Trump’s claim that statute 63(12) has “never been used before” is false,
with the New York AG using the law to bring lawsuits against such
parties as a leasing company, e-cigarette company JUUL Labs and a
predatory lender company. The Trump Organization case isn’t even the
first time 63(12) has been used against Trump and his businesses, as
former AG Eric Schneiderman previously sued Trump University under the
statute, which resulted in a $25 million settlement in 2018.

End quote.

If you mean a different Trump prosecution, let me know.
ScottW
2024-02-20 23:40:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by mINE109
Post by mINE109
Post by ScottW
Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry
about — that this only applied to Trump.
Turley replies...that's the real problem.
Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/
Leona Helmsley.
Bing can be helpful.
and full of crap....but you'll buy into anything that supports your bubble view.

All you need to ask and answer is this simple question.
Would this case have ever been filed if Trump had refrained from entering politics?

If you can answer that honestly, you'll know were in the age of gov't political persecution.

ScottW
Fascist Flea
2024-02-21 00:17:22 UTC
Permalink
Witlessmongrel battens down their anti-reality hatches.
Post by ScottW
Would this case have ever been filed if Trump had refrained from entering politics?
If you can answer that honestly, you'll know were in the age of gov't political persecution.
Your irrational faith does not constitute knowledge, dumbass.

How far gone are you, by your own estimation?
mINE109
2024-02-21 15:30:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by ScottW
Post by mINE109
Post by mINE109
Post by ScottW
Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry
about — that this only applied to Trump.
Turley replies...that's the real problem.
Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/
Leona Helmsley.
Bing can be helpful.
and full of crap....but you'll buy into anything that supports your bubble view.
It's not a bubble when it's verifiable and publicly available. Notice I
linked a court proceeding and you linked a Jonathan Turley hot take, so
maybe the pot is calling the kettle black as far as "bubble views" go.
Post by ScottW
All you need to ask and answer is this simple question.
Would this case have ever been filed if Trump had refrained from entering politics?
Should have been. The Trump University lawsuit preceded his candidacy.
Post by ScottW
If you can answer that honestly, you'll know were in the age of gov't political persecution.
The good old days, when real estate developers could commit fraud
without legal consequence?

https://time.com/6215419/trump-legal-trouble-key-strategies/

Hed: How Trump Survived Decades of Legal Trouble: Deny, Deflect, Delay,
and Don’t Put Anything in Writing
Art Sackman
2024-02-21 20:39:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by mINE109
Post by ScottW
Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry about — that this only applied to Trump.
Turley replies...that's the real problem.
Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/
Leona Helmsley.
no lie he put down what his appraisers estimated the value to be.
He didn't lie about what their estimates were
mINE109
2024-02-21 21:00:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Art Sackman
businesses that don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry
about.
no lie he put down what his appraisers estimated the value to be.
He didn't lie about what their estimates were
His fraud is a legal fact.

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/ef72526861902856/1e996397-full.pdf

Blame the Accountants
The crux of the defense at trial was that defendants relied on their
accountants, mainly Mazars, but sometimes Whitley Penn, to make sure
that the SFCs were accurate, and that responsibility for any
misrepresentations lies with the accountants, not defendants .
Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump testified several times that they
would have relied on their accountants to find any errors in the SFCs
supporting data.

As an initial matter, the Court notes that neither Mazars, nor Whitley
Penn, nor Donald Bender, is a defendant in this action, nor did
defendants ever attempt to implead them as third party defendants. More
significantly, however, this defense is wholly undercut by the
overwhelming evidence adduced at trial demonstrating that Mazars and
Whitley Penn relied on the Trump Organization, not vice versa, to be
truthful and accurate, and they had a right to do so...

Donald Trump himself acknowledged that, as was certified to in the
Management Representation Letters, he was responsible for the
preparation and fair presentation of financial statements.
There is overwhelming evidence from both interested and non-interested
witnesses, corroborated by documentary evidence, that the buck for being
truthful in the supporting data valuations stopped with the Trump
Organization, not the accountants. Moreover, the Trump Organization
intentionally engaged their accountants to perform compilations, as
opposed to reviews or audits, which provided the lowest level of
scrutiny and rely on the representations and information provided by the
client; compilation engagements make clear that the accountants will not
inquire, assess fraud risk, or test the accounting records.

End quote.

Also, too, there's the falsifying business records part.
Fascist Flea
2024-02-21 21:40:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by mINE109
Also, too, there's the falsifying business records part.
The delusions run deep in Dumpster-stan. Overbite went on TV and
squawked his outrage at the persecution of Idiot Baby. No one knew
this, but according to Eric, Dumpy "built the New York skyline".

Engoron's summary of the whole clan's estrangement from Reality
should headline the next constitutional amendment. "No pathological liar
may seek any Federal elective office, on penalty of imprisonment for life."
ScottW
2024-02-22 02:16:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by mINE109
businesses that don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry
about.
no lie he put down what his appraisers estimated the value to be.
He didn't lie about what their estimates were
His fraud is a legal fact.
The banks that loaned him the money disagree.

ScottW
mINE109
2024-02-22 15:53:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by ScottW
Post by mINE109
On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:47:30 PM UTC-5, mINE109
businesses that don't lie on their disclosure forms have
nothing to worry about.
no lie he put down what his appraisers estimated the value to
be. He didn't lie about what their estimates were
His fraud is a legal fact.
The banks that loaned him the money disagree.
The banks that lost money by giving more favorable rates due to his fraud?

If you mean Deutsche Bank, there's a can of worms.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-secret-ugly-breakup-with-deutsche-bank-revealed-2022-10?op=1

Deutsche Bank had long known that Trump exaggerated, James has said in
previous filings.

In fact, the bank routinely factored in these anticipated exaggerations,
applying what the AG called a Trump "haircut" or percentage reduction,
to whatever the former president swore on paper he was worth...

[https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23132444-deutschebankletter12720]

A week later, the exchange escalated. Deutsche Bank answered the Trump
lawyer's email with one from a lawyer of its own.

It was now lawyer versus lawyer.

"As you know, Donald J. Trump is required under the terms of his loan
guarantees to provide annual financial statements to Deutsche Bank and
to ensure that those statements 'are true and correct in all material
respects,'" the bank's attorney, Gregory Candela, wrote, quoting from
the guaranty agreement for the $170 million Old Post Office loan.

Candela repeated Deutsche Bank's request for "further information" on
the AG's fraud allegations. Then he upped the ante, saying the bank
needs that information in order to decide "whether an event of default
may have occurred."

End quote.

Deutsche Bank called in the loan and severed ties with Trump, hardly an
endorsement of his business practices.

The NY state law Trump was sued under doesn't require damages. Engeron:

https://eddsa.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/public/452564_2022_PEOPLE_OF_THE_STATE_OF_v_PEOPLE_OF_THE_STATE_OF_DECISION_AFTER_TRIAL_1688.pdf

"Timely and total repayment of loans does not extinguish the harm that
false statements inflict on the marketplace. Indeed, the common excuse
that “everybody does it” is all the more reason to strive for honesty
and transparency and to be vigilant in enforcing the rules. Here,
despite the false financial statements, it is undisputed that defendants
have made all required payments on time; the next group of lenders to
receive bogus statements might not be so lucky. New York means business
in combating business fraud."

Loading...