462
Trump loses bid for mistrial in New York fraud case
(www.the-independent.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
462 points (98.3% liked)
politics
19089 readers
3946 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Banks/lenders mostly.
Both the banks AND the people of New York.
He would over inflate the value of the properties in order to take out massive loans using the properties as collateral. So when it came to financing, his properties were cited as being extremely valuable. These lies defrauded the banks and lenders.
Then when it came time to pay taxes on the properties, he would massively deflate the values so he paid a fraction of the taxes on them. These lies defrauded the people of New York State as the beneficiaries of state taxation.
That’s who he defrauded (in this particular lawsuit.)
And to extend this point, submitting false statements of financial condition is fraud against the People of the State of New York, with disregard as to whether anyone lost money.
Yep, and to add to that, his legal team has already tried the, "But there were no victims, bro," line of arguments. Unsurprisingly, the judge was not convinced. You don't get to commit fraud just because everybody was enriched at the end of it.
I wonder if upon him losing this case, if any banks will sue for damages? They would have all the evidence already laid out for them, seems like an easy pay day for the shareholders.
Didn't the defense say they were going to put bankers on the stand who were going to say "No, we didn't care, it's all good"? I don't recall hearing from any of those bankers at all this week.
Yeah, I didn't see anything about any banks testifying. I can't image a bank that would get a representative on the stand to basically say, "he cheated us out of possibly millions, but that's fine", while at the same time foreclosing on someones home because they offered them a predator mortgage loan to make a few thousand extra (depending how long the homeowner took to go under water).
The biggest damage for Trump is that he will never be able to do it again. No banker in the world will accept him or anyone close to him telling them "it's a 15-storey building" without sending someone over and counting the stairs, they will even start counting the holes on Trump's golf courses. This means that he will no longer be able to get cheap loans or cheat on his taxes.
The banks may stay put, because otherwise their shareholders might ask why they did not get someone to count the floors in the first place, instead of believing a notorious liar. They will probably take the smaller losses and hope that Trump is still willing /stays capable to pay back some of the loans.