The NY case may be setting the stage for Trump to win- Billions of $.

Yep. A judge who looks like he's crazy too, I might add. I just now looked up his background which confirms my suspicions about that clown:

**Judge Arthur Engoron**, who is presiding over the case involving former President Donald Trump's real estate empire, has a fascinating background. Let me share some key details about him:
1. **Career and Education**:
- Engoron has served as a judge in **New York County** for the past **20 years**. He started on the city's civil court and later moved to the state supreme court.
-
2. **Varied Experiences**:
- Before becoming a judge, Engoron had an eclectic journey. He has:
- Driven a taxi cab.
- Played in a band.
- Protested during the Vietnam War.
3. **Notable Cases**:
- Engoron has resolved hundreds of disputes, ranging from zoning and free speech issues to a custody battle over a dog named "Stevie."
- Trump, listed as a potential witness, referred to Engoron as a **"political hack"** and vowed to appeal the fraud ruling¹.
In summary, Judge Arthur Engoron's diverse background and extensive legal experience make him a central figure in determining the fate of Trump's real estate holdings.

The writeup is from Copilot which is like getting someone from CNN or MSNBC. Note how they say he has extensive legal experience and don't say in WHAT! I doubt he ever financed a car. A taxi driver? Played in a band? A protester? Need we say more?

 

Love watching the debate in this thread.

In the end the appeals courts are going to decide all of this, our opinions are just that.

So. The battery thing wasn't an a analogy. It was to point out that disclaimers get put on even the most obvious products because, stupid people and greedy lawyers.
Disclaimers exist for one reason. They prevent stupid lawsuits. Mostly.

And no, an appraiser/loan officer will be ble to accurately know rents, income, etc and judge them against the company books.

Although that wasn't an allegation in the case, was it?

So. Mark this spot. Trump will win his appeals. Bigly.

 

Your comments are becoming more and more lame as we get closer to 2024.

 

The poster you replied to said:

How would a bank know rent rolls, income, profit and loss on a property? Do you think they have some way of determining that without the applicant?

This is what is happening in society today. We have many people who know nothing about business or finance chiming in. On a commercial property rents and profit and loss are part of the valuation of the property and a key element in determining value as the lender can then project the expected rents and profits in the future. For that, they would scour the financial reports which have what is called a rent roll, and the profits and expenses on rooms, food, and alcohol. Those numbers are not fudged because the lender also demands the tax returns and if those numbers do not match the tax returns (understated on the taxes to save on taxes) the bank and their accountants would demand further records. I used to order and review documents relating to commercial evaluations. I would hire accountants and appraisers to do that. That's what a bank does. They don't just hand over money based on the borrowers' estimations. That would be crazy. Reviewing a large commercial property for a loan takes a lot of time and expense.

The law she is using is a consumer protection law made to protect neophyte HOMEOWNERS against those with superior knowledge and not for equals going for a business transaction where each party is skilled and professional and uses advisers and attorneys.

 

Lets focus on this, would it be fraud if a person directed staff to reverse engineer these “company books”

Yes or no?

I try not to predict the future but if this case is judged on its merits trump will lose, at most he might have the amount lowered.

But facts are facts — this is fraud

And it’s not the first time him, his company and his children have been caught doing this.

 

So your saying that trumps lawyers are incompetent.

 

Duh. Criminal dick bags always get what's coming to em.

MAGA

 

Your hero Joe Biden should look out then !

 

Without. A. Victim. There. Is. No. Fraud.

 

Yes. There. Is.

 

The issue with such a countersuit, the following saying "We investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong". It's the wolf guarding the henhouse principle. We saw this in the Chutkin case. In that case, the judge made comments inferring the guilt of a potential defendant by name, BEFORE the case went on her docket.

If that had been a jury member, that jury member would be disqualified on the spot. The whole reason judges don't make such comments outside of the sentencing statement is to preserve the presumption of innocence. What if he hadn't been charged in the DC incident? And so when that mockery came with a whole bunch of federal judges standing behind Her Honor declaring herself free of bias, all one has to do is laugh in mock disgust of the court system.


All of that to say is that even though the NY AG has publicly stated her intentions, and even though this amount is not based on any actual damages, but rather on the amount of money he made after the transaction(and by all accounts, nowhere close to the actual valuation of the real estate in question), there's not a shot in hell that this judiciary will agree that Trump faced malicious prosecution.

 

What crimes did he commit again? It's hard to keep up with Trump loving rightists fantasies these days.

 

The empty drum makes the most noise.

 

I can't speak for every state but I know Florida requires a plaintiff to obtain permission before suing and limits awards.

Even then Trump would need to prove any legal actions were malicious and that would be nearly impossible.

ESPECIALLY given the quality of attorney Trump is able to draw.

 

Except there was victims, the bank lost money (whether they want to peruse it is irrelevant), it also impacted the state and insurers. It could also have impacted other property owners if this changed valuation comps.

That said, even if none of the above is true, a law was broken, several actually. Society would be a located heavily if we allow outright fraud on loan applications. We also frequently prosecute others without a “victim” such as speeding laws.

It doesn’t matter how many times you repeat it

 

Executive Law 63(12) is invoked by repeated fraudulent behavior - regardless of whether or not anyone complains. And the absence of complaints is not a defense to the offending behavior.

 

There still has to be a "fraudulent act". A fraudulent act requires a victim.

 

The banks testified that ttump was a desireable customer and they sought his business.
No victi. There.

The insurers testified pretty much the same: trump was a good custo.er and was sought out.

The state sets the value and the tax rate. No victim there no matter how you twist it.

Comparing so called "victimless crimes" to fraud is rediculous. The definition of fraud demands a victim. Like trying to say a marriage can have only one participant, fraud requires both a perpetrator and a victim.

 

How did it impact the bank? They used their OWN appraisals and valuations.

 

Except he didn't and the Banks themselves said so.

 

If you try to research this online it's like going down a rabbit hole. Copilot and Gemini are useless. I inquired as to the actual law that was broken and all they say is "fraud". They claim that inflated values were submitted. This gets us back to square one. If I think my house is worth a million dollars and the bank values it at $900,000. am I guilty of fraud? If I am an attorney or advocate for an individual or company and I demand ten million for something and I swear it is worth that, and I later accept 6 million, was I guilty of fraud?

The online search claims Trump was guilty of insurance fraud. I don't know how they could allege that if the insurance company paid the claim(s) and didn't prosecute him for "fraud". Insurers are required to go after suspected fraudulent claims.

 

So because they don’t want to testify against him to keep doing business with him that means he didn’t lie on those documents to inflate his assets?

That doesn’t make sense

The state disagrees

There was a victim.

If a domestic abuse occurs and the victim refuses to file charges the state can do so. All the state has to do is show it happened. In this case they not only proved it happened they have testimony showing it was purposely done.

 

Correct, based off fraudulent numbers and edited books.

If I tell you I am making 10k a month on a commercial property and you buy it at that amount, and then it comes out I was only making 8k — is that fraud?

 

No, there does not need to be a victim in order to have engaged in fraudulent business practices - the offense proscribed by Executive Law 63(12).

The absence of a victim is not a defense.

 

You are making that up. I have experience in commercial appraisals and you cannot get away with that. The bank will require tax returns and NO ONE overtakes rents and income on a tax return. Where are you getting your info from? Leticia? The judge who is a former cab driver, hippie and drifter (protester) who has no business experience?