• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

AZRWinger said:
It's what you'd hear when it's a sham excuse for an investigation not a real probe.

Comparing the Hillary investigations conducted with a predetermined nothing to see here outcome with the barrageooii I 6⁶yojoll

Feel free to answer the question presented. Unless of course you simply can't.
Click to expand...
I'm not here to spoon feed you information. You asked a question that's answered both in detail in the filing and directly in the summary that I linked to. Literally just click the link if you're too lazy to look at the filing that this thread is about if you want your question answered. It's right there.
 
bave said:
The fact that we are now, many moons later, hearing about it via a civil action doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...
It makes complete sense. It's campaign stunt by a Democrat relying on TDS to get reelected.
 
MTAtech said:
I agree but in this matter Trump is being treated better than anyone else. If this was you or me, they would have arrested us on numerous charges, including insurance fraud and tax evasion.
Click to expand...
Like when Hillary got caught with classified data on her private unclassified email server, and you didn't think that was serious? Yeah, that was all nothing, and Comey didn't give a huge helping hand in subverting the law. Nahhhh, nothing to see there. ;) Nobody goes to Leavenworth for leaking classified data.
 
Gnosis said:
Don't waste my time and the server's bandwidth with your bullshit, please.
Click to expand...
Don't you worry, we're going to keep putting him out there and blowing all the bandwidth we want. ;)
 
American said:
Like when Hillary got caught with classified data on her private unclassified email server, and you didn't think that was serious? Yeah, that was all nothing, and Comey didn't give a huge helping hand in subverting the law. Nahhhh, nothing to see there. ;) Nobody goes to Leavenworth for leaking classified data.
Click to expand...
It's not all the same and I may need to remind you that in the Clinton matter Jeff Sessions, who was AG at the time, didn't think it was chargeable either.
 
American said:
Like when Hillary got caught with classified data on her private unclassified email server, and you didn't think that was serious? Yeah, that was all nothing, and Comey didn't give a huge helping hand in subverting the law. Nahhhh, nothing to see there. ;) Nobody goes to Leavenworth for leaking classified data.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that was just fine?
 
AZRWinger said:
Typical Bad Orange man hysterical drivel. Innocent until proven guilty or even the pretense of impartial justice is denigrated to lying.
Click to expand...
You conveniently forgot his theft of over $2 million from a so-called 'charity' his 'foundation' set up, and which he was forced to repay, and the foundation ordered to close. I believe theft is against the law. Then there was the $25 million settlement he was forced to pay out over his fraudulent 'university'; again a serious crime. Further back in time he broke the law pertaining to race discrimination. The guy has a rap sheet as long as your arm, and to pretend otherwise is laughable. He regards encounters with the law as an occupational hazard.
 
CaughtInThe said:
if you're NOT in favor of financial fraud then you should hate the trumps for what they did.

hell, you should already hate the father for being a thief and huckster.
Click to expand...
Fred Trump was no better and was sued by the government for breaching race relations legislation. He settled out of court.
 
Rawley said:
It makes complete sense. It's campaign stunt by a Democrat relying on TDS to get reelected.
Click to expand...

The use of the term "TDS" automatically defeats any arguments used by the right.

TDS, like most MAGA/Right buzzwords, is little more than a sign of desperation.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Its all that matters.
That is, if law is to be applied impartially.
Click to expand...

MSN

www.msn.com
In Clinton's case, authorities were looking at the former secretary of state's use of a private email account for communication with her staff - some of that correspondence was later found to contain confidential information.

In Trump's case, the probe stems from boxes of classified documents found at the former president's Florida home.
...
"Whereas Hillary Clinton's email server never contained properly marked classified information in the various emails received from or sent to unclassified government email accounts, the documents in Donald Trump's possession were properly marked as classified and continued to have those markings at the time of their seizure," Bradley Moss, a Washington-based national security lawyer, wrote in an email.

In other words, it's possible Trump, or someone on his team, knowingly withheld confidential records after being asked to return them in a way that Clinton did not.
...
In July 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey announced the findings from the Clinton email investigation and determined that the former secretary of state was "extremely careless" in her handling of "very sensitive, highly classified information," but did not find clear evidence that Clinton "intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information."
...
Now, the question of intent may be the key difference between the two investigations.

The search of Trump's Florida home is just the latest development in a monthslong probe into the former president's handling of government documents.

In June, one of Trump's lawyers signed a statement asserting that all classified material at Mar-a-Lago had been returned, according to reporting from the New York Times.
...
But the FBI's search last week, which recovered 11 sets of documents marked as confidential or secret, suggests that at least some of the classified material had not been returned.

"The key difference here is likely that with the former president, the Justice Department sought the return of the classified material, putting him on notice that he might be in violation of the law and when they didn't get it back, they used a search warrant to find and seize it,'" Jaffer said.
 
Cardinal said:
By every Republican-led investigation? That seems odd, don't you think?



Don't forget the State Department and DOJ under Trump. They also dropped their investigations without finding any wrongdoing.
Click to expand...

You beat me to it.

I don't think he thought his post through before making it.
 
If I'd have told you 20 years ago an entire group of people on the Republican side would defend those who attempted an insurrection, defend those who are thieves, defend those who have practiced financial fraud and defend those who attack decent military people what would you have said?
 
CaughtInThe said:
If I'd have told you 20 years ago an entire group of people on the Republican side would defend those who attempted an insurrection, defend those who are thieves, defend those who have practiced financial fraud and defend those who attack decent military people what would you have said?
Click to expand...

20 years ago, when I was a loyal Republican? I would have told you that you're a lying asshole.

Today I would tell you that you are 100% right. But of course, 20 years ago, I never saw the Republicans being a cult of ignorance supporting an anti-American lifelong liberal piece of shit named Trump.
 
bave said:
We are in the realm of semantics now.

My point is that when you have a lending situation of this size, the borrower doesn't just get to *claim* a valuation, they have to *substantiate* a valuation. That includes precisely what you have listed above. In those would be audited financials, proformas, projections, appraisals, etc. That's been my point all along, the bank is going to look at a stack of information from third parties, not take the borrower's word. You don't just get to go up and claim your collateral is worth $100MM, you have to be able to back that up with third parties. In smaller lending deals those are ordered by the banks, in larger deals they are provided by the involved parties, but subject to review and approval by the other parties. So, when this deal got done Trump likely provided a stack of third party resources to DB who reviewed and and found them credible enough to proceed. Now, if those documents are falsified, that is another matter entirely. However, if you had falsified documents in there this would be a slam dunk criminal prosecution as well, not a civil matter. Moreover we would have heard about it long before this from the IRS, NY Dept of Rev, a US-AA, or DB. The fact that we are now, many moons later, hearing about it via a civil action doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Yes, you keep repeating yourself, regardless of the fact that what you claim doesn’t happen is exactly what the banks your failed fuhrer relied on did.

But they’re all in the business of enabling money laundering, and the trump brand and his real estate exist for that purpose.

If Deustche Bank didn’t lend trump the money, Putin’s banks in Cyprus did.

None of the banks and institutions in the legittmate world would lend trump a dime.
 
TomFitz said:
Yes, you keep repeating yourself, regardless of the fact that what you claim doesn’t happen is exactly what the banks your failed fuhrer relied on did.

But they’re all in the business of enabling money laundering, and the trump brand and his real estate exist for that purpose.

If Deustche Bank didn’t lend trump the money, Putin’s banks in Cyprus did.

None of the banks and institutions in the legittmate world would lend trump a dime.
Click to expand...

DB isn't a legitimate bank?
 
TomFitz said:
Yes, you keep repeating yourself, regardless of the fact that what you claim doesn’t happen is exactly what the banks your failed fuhrer relied on did.

But they’re all in the business of enabling money laundering, and the trump brand and his real estate exist for that purpose.

If Deustche Bank didn’t lend trump the money, Putin’s banks in Cyprus did.

None of the banks and institutions in the legittmate world would lend trump a dime.
Click to expand...

The only reason Trump went to Deutsche Bank is that no other lender would loan him money. That was a well known fact in NY. Deutsche Bank is not regulated by the 3 US federal agencies and as such, they have far more latitude to turn a profit and make bad loans.
 
Cardinal said:
By every Republican-led investigation? That seems odd, don't you think?



Don't forget the State Department and DOJ under Trump. They also dropped their investigations without finding any wrongdoing.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what Republican led investigations into Hillary's illegal server you refer to. The most important one was the DOJ/FBI investigation in 2 parts. Hillary was scandalously given a pass on the former. Even worse, the FBI fraudulently certified they had reviewed the documents Hillary's BFF Huma had stored on her husband's unsecured laptop before giving her a pass on prosecution.

The simple fact is the decision not to prosecute Hillary and Huma was blatantly political. The rule of law simply doesn't apply to Democrat elites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom