Trump, adult children sued by New York attorney general for fraud

[ClaraD]

Since the career prosecutors in the DOJ have already looked at all this stuff (remember Michael Cohen?), they might indeed laugh.
But perhaps at Ms. James.

So, is that why a judge dismissed Trumps frivolous lawsuit against her?

 

[Grand Mal]

Q: What's the easiest way to get Republicans to support crime?

A: Accuse a wealthy white man.

 

[MTAtech]

The premise is that it is very hard to prove because it's not clearcut-- people can have different opinions about the value of property and how that value might change.

Meanwhile-- the guy either shot somebody on 5th Ave or he didn't.

As I wrote earlier, it’s not just a mild difference of valuation, it’s absurd differences. As an example, Trump Tower in Chicago was valued at zero. That’s right, a multi-story luxury residential building was worthless on Trump’s books.

Donald Trump accused of using his Chicago tower as part of alleged business fraud

New York attorney general sued the former president and his company and alleged Trump Tower Chicago was part of scheme.

www.chicagotribune.com

 

[snakestretcher]

Given that the state:
1. took over the crumbs of what the feds left over.
2. They have been unable to produce a bank who has been harmed.
3. They have passed on a criminal investigation

Perhaps it is Ms. James and her defenders who are making the wild claims.

Like I said, wait until you pass judgement. Neither you nor I are privy to the details of the investigation.

 

[snakestretcher]

You said "nearly nonstop for over 25 years" not me. Your list is closer to a 15 year gap between some bs and some justified investigations.
I'm aware. I know my history.

The question remains; why are you defending a thief, fraudster, racist and serial liar in Trump? Because those are admirable qualities in a world leader?

 

[bave]

A great example of bank fraud is fraudulently stating that your financials are GAAP compliant when they're not and using those financials to obtain loans.

When did I ever talk about misrepresenting business financials? If you are making up a P/L statement, tax statement, or something similar, that is a very different animal. I am saying that it isn't bank fraud when you say a property is worth X when it later appraises for 50% of X.

Also, again, you clearly don't understand how these types of loans are made. Repeating myself again for you, real estate investment banks typically rely on information provided by the borrower.

Again, this is my wheelhouse. I worked in the PE space for my entire career where loans of this nature were common place. No bank, ever, relies on information provided by the lender. I have never in my life seen a loan skip underwriting and verification.

I would however, again, point out that if Deutsche was defrauded by Trump or his people providing objectively false financial statements why isn't DB making this complaint? Where are they in the process? If they felt wronged, they would be front and center, but they aren't and that says a lot. It similarly says a lot that if what you are alleging is fact, why didn't the IRS or state department of revenue staple his nuts to the wall long ago? It doesn't make sense.

It's not inaccurate at all. It shows you either do not know the law or you are ignoring it

Maybe in Canada, but not in the US. Show me the code, show me a conviction. Show me something to support your point of view.

 

[Athanasius68]

So, is that why a judge dismissed Trumps frivolous lawsuit against her?

Not sure what that has to do with anything.

 

[Athanasius68]

The difference is that I don't defend him for that, nor do I minimize the crime by calling it a "process crime," nor do I go into full victim mode by saying "He had to commit perjury to protect himself from the Democrat-hating right." He committed a crime and that's that.

The term 'process crime' means a crime that save for the investigation would not have occurred.

Mueller wasn't investigating a person like PapaD to see whether he had a propensity to lie to the FBI. He was investigating him to discover what role he played in the Trump/Russia conspiracy of 2016.
And Mueller never charged him for anything to do with the conspiracy (because there was none).

That is what was being said.

But Republicans only got to that perjury by doing a fishing expedition first. What got him to perjury was that they found something embarrassing, not criminal.

Yeah-- but Clinton did commit perjury.
Trump-- not so much.

You're admitting that the investigation into Benghazi itself...the underlying reason for the investigation...was pointless.

An embassy had been sacked and Americans killed. It was absolutely the proper role of Congress to investigate-- to provide oversite of State Dept. operations.

Because it was a non-issue. And we know Republicans weren't really concerned either because now Trump has committed a thousand times the thing Clinton was accused of, and they don't care.

mishandling govt information is mishandling govt information.

 

[CaughtInThe]

When did I ever talk about misrepresenting business financials? If you are making up a P/L statement, tax statement, or something similar, that is a very different animal. I am saying that it isn't bank fraud when you say a property is worth X when it later appraises for 50% of X.



Again, this is my wheelhouse. I worked in the PE space for my entire career where loans of this nature were common place. No bank, ever, relies on information provided by the lender. I have never in my life seen a loan skip underwriting and verification.

I would however, again, point out that if Deutsche was defrauded by Trump or his people providing objectively false financial statements why isn't DB making this complaint? Where are they in the process? If they felt wronged, they would be front and center, but they aren't and that says a lot. It similarly says a lot that if what you are alleging is fact, why didn't the IRS or state department of revenue staple his nuts to the wall long ago? It doesn't make sense.



Maybe in Canada, but not in the US. Show me the code, show me a conviction. Show me something to support your point of view.

Are in favor of or against financial fraud?

Are in favor of or against financial fraud against you personally?

 

[AZRWinger]

I'm well aware of that. There were no underlying crimes though. And yes, committing perjury was an unforced error and it's bad, but what Republicans were initially investigating the Clintons for was itself the purest example of a fishing expedition.



No. And it's not like the results of that investigation really support you anyway.



I understand that the Benghazi investigation (all of them) wrapped up without finding anything wrong. Now, it did result in finding Clinton's email server, which yielded multiple investigations of their own that went nowhere.

But it all goes to show that they were always fishing expeditions.

Bill Clinton didn't lose his law license over his perjury. The Arkansas state bar suspended it for 5 years. Less than a slap on the wrist but heavy punishment for a Clinton.

Benghazi showed plenty of wrongdoing by an administration so concerned with political optics they abandoned a group of Americans, including our Ambassador to die at the hands of terrorists they empowered. The Nobel Peace prize winner POTUS with full knowledge of the attack in progress retired to the WH family quarters so he could rest up for his campaign trip to Las Vegas the following day. Sacrifices have to be made for the great man's reelection US diplomatic personnel are expendable. Then there is the whole video scam.

Hillary's illegal email server led to the discovery of numerous felonies committed by her and her co-conspirators despite an FBI more concerned about offending the putative next President and an FBI showering grants of immunity from prosecution. Comey's report listed multiple felonies clearly supported by compelling evidence. The Clinton's were so worried they staged a clandestine meeting with the AG shortly before Hillary's FBI sham interview. But hey, there was no prosecution because Hillary was going to be the next POTUS.

 

[AZRWinger]

It's a problem trump created for himself. If he didn't commit so many damn crimes, he wouldn't be in a position where he has to plead the fifth in a civil case to protect himself in a different criminal case.

The issue is the conspiracy of NY prosecutors perverting the process by pursuing the civil case as a stalking horse for their crusade against the Bad Orange man.

 

[CaughtInThe]

 

[bave]

Are in favor of or against financial fraud?

Are in favor of or against financial fraud against you personally?

When I have been involved in business deals I verify information provided by the other side of the table. I am sure DB did the same here. I have only heard one, minor, possibility of damages presented so far related to a conservation easement. There are no damages related to anything on the financial fraud side.

 

[CaughtInThe]

When I have been involved in business deals I verify information provided by the other side of the table. I am sure DB did the same here. I have only heard one, minor, possibility of damages presented so far related to a conservation easement. There are no damages related to anything on the financial fraud side.

Are in favor of or against financial fraud?

 

[Gnosis]

Thanks, have a day.

Here's some Biden for you...


What an embarrassment.

Don't waste my time and the server's bandwidth with your bullshit, please.

 

[bave]

Are in favor of or against financial fraud?

Is this english?

No one is in favor of financial fraud. Again, let me reiterate my issue. Equal treatment under the law.

You have a politically motivated AG, who ran on a platform of prosecuting someone prior to ever having look at evidence. That same person is now running for re-election on a platform of politically motivated retribution. I could care less if Trump gets run over by a bus tomorrow. If he is guilty of a crime, that's fine, pursue it through the same way you would anyone else. It is however clear that isn't what is happening. You have a prosecutor who declared a *political opponent* a target for purely political purposes. That person then used the power of the office to target an individual where there is no evidence of a crime. She was forced to pursue a civil action because of how weak the evidence in fact is, combined with the fact that despite these issues being looked for for a very long time nothing has come of them.

It's absurd. You can't have a legal system that people have no faith in because it is constantly viewed as politically motivated.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Is this english?

No one is in favor of financial fraud. Again, let me reiterate my issue. Equal treatment under the law.

You have a politically motivated AG, who ran on a platform of prosecuting someone prior to ever having look at evidence. That same person is now running for re-election on a platform of politically motivated retribution. I could care less if Trump gets run over by a bus tomorrow. If he is guilty of a crime, that's fine, pursue it through the same way you would anyone else. It is however clear that isn't what is happening. You have a prosecutor who declared a *political opponent* a target for purely political purposes. That person then used the power of the office to target an individual where there is no evidence of a crime. She was forced to pursue a civil action because of how weak the evidence in fact is, combined with the fact that despite these issues being looked for for a very long time nothing has come of them.

It's absurd. You can't have a legal system that people have no faith in because it is constantly viewed as politically motivated.

Are YOU in favor of or against financial fraud?

 

[Gnosis]

What I find amusing is that whenever someone disagrees with a political hatchet job, that means you are a "trumpist". If you are so familiar with my posting history, you would see that I have never espoused and love for Trump and have been consistently negative in my opinion of him, both before he was elected, during his term, and after his term. The difference is that my distaste for him, or anyone else for that matter, doesn't mean that I think they should receive unfair treatment under the law of the land while you seem to.

Look at what some of the people on your side of the fence have said in this very thread. We have had a number of people state they "don't care what happened", they just want some Trumpian ass. That's insanity and you seem to be perfectly ok with mob rule.

Well, no. No one should be persecuted. But anyone who thinks Trump isn't guilty of many, many crimes is a lying piece of shit. Let him have his time in court and hang himself.

 

[AZRWinger]

Alrighty then. Whatever this means, I'll leave you to it. Everything you write is odd. My mistake.

When logic supported by facts appears "odd" there is no point in holding more discussion. However, it is not going to foreclose discussion with rational actors.

 

[Michael Cole]

When logic supported by facts appears "odd" there is no point in holding more discussion. However, it is not going to foreclose discussion with rational actors.

Well Jiminy Cricket. You have fun with your...whatever it is...you have fun with it.

 

[AZRWinger]

Well, no. No one should be persecuted. But anyone who thinks Trump isn't guilty of many, many crimes is a lying piece of shit. Let him have his time in court and hang himself.

Typical Bad Orange man hysterical drivel. Innocent until proven guilty or even the pretense of impartial justice is denigrated to lying.

 

[Cardinal]

The term 'process crime' means a crime that save for the investigation would not have occurred.

Mueller wasn't investigating a person like PapaD to see whether he had a propensity to lie to the FBI. He was investigating him to discover what role he played in the Trump/Russia conspiracy of 2016.
And Mueller never charged him for anything to do with the conspiracy (because there was none).

That is what was being said.

Huh, so Clinton's perjury was a process crime then. I didn't think of it that way. Thanks!

Yeah-- but Clinton did commit perjury a process crime.

Fixed.

Trump-- not so much.

An embassy had been sacked and Americans killed. It was absolutely the proper role of Congress to investigate-- to provide oversite of State Dept. operations.

And multiple investigations uncovered nothing.

mishandling govt information is mishandling govt information.

3 separate Republican-led investigations were ended without uncovering crimes.

So it appears that the final score is one process crime from 24 years ago. That's it.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Yea, even if you were a VP of lending at a credit union, bringing down that mad $100k a year, you would know better than this. Moreover, if you were, you would be able to easily cite the law supporting your statements

Because I don't feed the sealions, sorry. The filing contains this information and has been posted. As have the laws mentioned within.

You are in a position of saying you don't understand how James could allege Trump broke laws.

Somehow you think that's everyone else problem

It isn't. Good luck.

When you catch up, come on back.

 

[Cardinal]

Bill Clinton didn't lose his law license over his perjury. The Arkansas state bar suspended it for 5 years. Less than a slap on the wrist but heavy punishment for a Clinton.

Benghazi showed plenty of wrongdoing by an administration so concerned with political optics they abandoned a group of Americans, including our Ambassador to die at the hands of terrorists they empowered.

House Benghazi Report Finds No New Evidence of Wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton (Published 2016)

Ending one of the longest, costliest and most bitterly partisan congressional investigations in history, the Select Committee on Benghazi issued its report.

www.nytimes.com

The Nobel Peace prize winner POTUS with full knowledge of the attack in progress retired to the WH family quarters so he could rest up for his campaign trip to Las Vegas the following day. Sacrifices have to be made for the great man's reelection US diplomatic personnel are expendable. Then there is the whole video scam.

Hillary's illegal email server led to the discovery of numerous felonies committed by her and her co-conspirators despite an FBI more concerned about offending the putative next President and an FBI showering grants of immunity from prosecution. Comey's report listed multiple felonies clearly supported by compelling evidence. The Clinton's were so worried they staged a clandestine meeting with the AG shortly before Hillary's FBI sham interview. But hey, there was no prosecution because Hillary was going to be the next POTUS.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/justice-dept-winds-down-clinton-related-inquiry-once-championed-by-trump-it-found-nothing-of-consequence/2020/01/09/ca83932e-32f9-11ea-a053-dc6d944ba776_story.html

 

[Cardinal]

The issue is the conspiracy of NY prosecutors perverting the process by pursuing the civil case as a stalking horse for their crusade against the Bad Orange man.

This is just persecution-complex noise.