---President Elect Musk and Convicted Felon Donald J Trump---

JesseMcK

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

Gern Blansten

2023

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

Halifax2TheMax

2023

Does this strike anyone as the behaviour of an innocent business person before the court, never mind “normal?”

Donald Trump’s attorney Christopher Kise revived a request for the former president to be able to give his own summation Thursday, to which New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron had said no the day before.

Engoron asked Trump if he would agree to stick to case-related subjects — the same sticking point that led to Engoron’s earlier denial — prompting Trump to begin ranting from his courtroom seat.

“What’s happened here, sir, is a fraud on me,” Trump said. “If I’m not allowed to talk about [the political motivation] — it really is a disservice. I would say that’s a big part of the case. I would say it’s 100 percent.”

Engoron asked Kise to “please control your client,” but Kise did not appear to make any effort to do so.

Trump also railed against New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), and reiterated his misleading claim that he was denied a jury. At one point, Engoron audibly sighed into his microphone and gave Trump one minute to wrap up his remarks.

“I know this is boring to you,” Trump said. “You have your own agenda. You can’t listen for more than one minute.”

Engoron also challenged Trump on a claim that he had never been in trouble with banks before. “By the way, you said you’ve never had a problem — haven’t you been sued before?” Engoron said.

“I should have won it every time,” Trump shot back.

In all, Trump spoke for about six minutes, until Engoron said the defense had used up its allotted time, and they were going to break for lunch.

“Okay, it’s one o’clock. … Mr. Kise, this could have been done differently, and there would have been much more time,” Engoron said.

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/lawofruby/status/1745560266358599826?t=idNcMihk1a6yk-7-TtjHtA&s=19

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/lawofruby/status/1745543676736979027?t=bNOEp_Nb1uYovKQK0tTImA&s=19

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1745557422578483493?t=2sDZbDeZT2Ja2ihJ6ldiNg&s=19

Halifax2TheMax

2023

mickeyrat said:

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1745557422578483493?t=2sDZbDeZT2Ja2ihJ6ldiNg&s=19

POOTWH can’t talk without the mesmerizing hand movements. He’s got his cult mesmerized, that’s for sure.

Gern Blansten

2023

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S65jqrHQi_c

mickeyrat

giggle...

https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1745926396382245094?t=vgVyD5U--GwrtHTnFGtaRA&s=19

mrussel1

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Merkin Baller

Why even have laws? 

JesseMcK

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Haha - I mean come on. Let's not lose our grip here. This is not a serious concern.

Also I really hope this Fani Willis stuff is not true. The Georgia case is serious. People need to stop fucking up when they go after him. This stuff is so sensitive. Willis and Smith need to be completely above board in their approach on these cases. The evidence speaks for itself.

mickeyrat

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Haha - I mean come on. Let's not lose our grip here. This is not a serious concern.

Also I really hope this Fani Willis stuff is not true. The Georgia case is serious. People need to stop fucking up when they go after him. This stuff is so sensitive. Willis and Smith need to be completely above board in their approach on these cases. The evidence speaks for itself.

replay of debunked bullshit by a defendant, Listen to the Ben Wittes on  jan 11 episode of The Bulwark podcast .

mickeyrat

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1746153690354823458?t=TqAFId6pI_OR8Wl16nrVKQ&s=19

mrussel1

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Haha - I mean come on. Let's not lose our grip here. This is not a serious concern.

Also I really hope this Fani Willis stuff is not true. The Georgia case is serious. People need to stop fucking up when they go after him. This stuff is so sensitive. Willis and Smith need to be completely above board in their approach on these cases. The evidence speaks for itself.

What? Business fraud isn't serious? When you work in banking,  half of your time is avoiding massive penalties and jail.  Are you in that business? I am.  

JesseMcK

mrussel1 said:

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Haha - I mean come on. Let's not lose our grip here. This is not a serious concern.

Also I really hope this Fani Willis stuff is not true. The Georgia case is serious. People need to stop fucking up when they go after him. This stuff is so sensitive. Willis and Smith need to be completely above board in their approach on these cases. The evidence speaks for itself.

What? Business fraud isn't serious? When you work in banking,  half of your time is avoiding massive penalties and jail.  Are you in that business? I am.  

No, it's not serious compared to the real crimes he committed. Trump doesn't work for a bank. He's not regulated like banks are. And this is a civil trial, not a criminal one.

This is making my earlier point, I think some people are under the delusion that Trump could go to jail over this. He's facing a monetary penalty. He can still breathe free air, he can still run for president. This doesn't matter. It's a silly distraction, brought on for political reasons. Again, I hate the guy, but that's the truth of it. We can abandon moral high ground to chase him, but we should at least be honest with ourselves when we do it. When you come at Trump with half-laid plans he wriggles free. The man openly organized an insurrection and tried to overthrow a vote. LEt's focus on that. Whether Eric Trump should understand GAAP after getting his MBA is fucking trivial. It allows people who want an excuse to dismiss the real wrongdoing to lump all this together as noise.

I don't like it. I don't see the upside, but clearly I'm in the minority.

benjs

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Haha - I mean come on. Let's not lose our grip here. This is not a serious concern.

Also I really hope this Fani Willis stuff is not true. The Georgia case is serious. People need to stop fucking up when they go after him. This stuff is so sensitive. Willis and Smith need to be completely above board in their approach on these cases. The evidence speaks for itself.

What? Business fraud isn't serious? When you work in banking,  half of your time is avoiding massive penalties and jail.  Are you in that business? I am.  

No, it's not serious compared to the real crimes he committed. Trump doesn't work for a bank. He's not regulated like banks are. And this is a civil trial, not a criminal one.

This is making my earlier point, I think some people are under the delusion that Trump could go to jail over this. He's facing a monetary penalty. He can still breathe free air, he can still run for president. This doesn't matter. It's a silly distraction, brought on for political reasons. Again, I hate the guy, but that's the truth of it. We can abandon moral high ground to chase him, but we should at least be honest with ourselves when we do it. When you come at Trump with half-laid plans he wriggles free. The man openly organized an insurrection and tried to overthrow a vote. LEt's focus on that. Whether Eric Trump should understand GAAP after getting his MBA is fucking trivial. It allows people who want an excuse to dismiss the real wrongdoing to lump all this together as noise.

I don't like it. I don't see the upside, but clearly I'm in the minority.

Say Donald Trump wasn’t once a politician, and he was accused of the same offences. There would be no politics involved, the Judges involved would pursue justice, and that would be considered a move towards justice. 

Modify the situation, and say that he was a politician (same accusations leveled again). Now your argument is that the political approach is to pursue justice, and the proper one is to drop the case? That’s not logically consistent in my eyes. 

I also don’t understand the suggestion that because a penalty is monetary rather than jail time, that it is inconsequential.

I also don’t understand the suggestion that because a man is a weasel, he should not be tried for lesser offences.

I also disagree that an ‘upside’, or a ‘satisfying’ resolution, is at all relevant in this discussion. How the public chooses to react to a court’s genuine pursuit of justice shouldn’t be a factor in how legal or civil cases are pursued, nor should it encourage or discourage how or whether either type of case is pursued.

mickeyrat

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Haha - I mean come on. Let's not lose our grip here. This is not a serious concern.

Also I really hope this Fani Willis stuff is not true. The Georgia case is serious. People need to stop fucking up when they go after him. This stuff is so sensitive. Willis and Smith need to be completely above board in their approach on these cases. The evidence speaks for itself.

What? Business fraud isn't serious? When you work in banking,  half of your time is avoiding massive penalties and jail.  Are you in that business? I am.  

No, it's not serious compared to the real crimes he committed. Trump doesn't work for a bank. He's not regulated like banks are. And this is a civil trial, not a criminal one.

This is making my earlier point, I think some people are under the delusion that Trump could go to jail over this. He's facing a monetary penalty. He can still breathe free air, he can still run for president. This doesn't matter. It's a silly distraction, brought on for political reasons. Again, I hate the guy, but that's the truth of it. We can abandon moral high ground to chase him, but we should at least be honest with ourselves when we do it. When you come at Trump with half-laid plans he wriggles free. The man openly organized an insurrection and tried to overthrow a vote. LEt's focus on that. Whether Eric Trump should understand GAAP after getting his MBA is fucking trivial. It allows people who want an excuse to dismiss the real wrongdoing to lump all this together as noise.

I don't like it. I don't see the upside, but clearly I'm in the minority.

I'll take putting him out of busines to start. Seem to recall FELONY charges in Manhattan pending.

At every turn this case has been described as Civil in nature.

Being held accountable is the thing. This , more than jail,  hurts his ego. THAT is everything imo for this piece of shit . I personally dont give a fuck about someones delusional thinking about any of this.

The rule of law either matters or it doesnt.

Due Process. Chips fall. I'm good with that , no matter the potential for disappointment.

Halifax2TheMax

2023

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

JesseMcK said:

mrussel1 said:

Gern Blansten said:

JesseMcK said:

mickeyrat said:

JesseMcK said:

Cards on the table - I despise Trump, but this civil fraud case is stupid, and if he skates the unseriousness of it will be mixed into the larger stew of "everyone against Trump" narrative. I work in finance, including some large scale infrastructure in the past, no bank in their right mind cares a lick at what internally prepared financial statements show. Also to my knowledge he hasn't defaulted and there hasn't been a collateral shortfall (at least since the 80s bankruptcy stuff). The stuff with Stormy Daniels and this are just distractions.

Jack Smith's case, and the Georgia case are the only ones that matter.

no skating. already been been guilty of fraud. this is all about penalties.

There was a pre-trial finding that some fraud has occurred true, but the larger issues are still at play. The trial was not just about setting the level of the fine.

While it's true that this being a bench trial with a seemingly hostile judge probably precludes him getting off without penalties, my point is - Trump's not going to jail for this. This is a stupid civil trial over GAAP interpretations which may result in a monetary penalty or a suspension of a business license in NY. I don't get the feeling that most people understand this. The consequences are not going to be satisfying or represent justice in any way.

The other two trials matter. This one is stupid, and political. In my opinion, it makes the people pursuing it look corrupt, and I wish everyone would get out of the way for Jack Smith. If the strategy is to use garbage like this to sap Trump's resources, fine, but we should be honest when our side (me making a presumption about this board's political leaning) are playing dirty.

I get what you are saying. I'm not sure I agree that it's stupid though. The banks were injured by giving him lower interest rates based on the fraudulent financial statements. I realize that they banks aren't really claiming damages though.

The banks were injured, but more importantly the state was injured.  If he received interest rates lower than market value based on fraudulent statements, then the bank earned less interest than reasonable.  Less interest income means less in taxes, meaning less in tax revenue for the state.  

Besides, particularly in NY, the state always has an interest in preventing fraud even among two consenting parties.  Just because the banks don't care, or were complicit, doesn't make it legal under NY law. 

Haha - I mean come on. Let's not lose our grip here. This is not a serious concern.

Also I really hope this Fani Willis stuff is not true. The Georgia case is serious. People need to stop fucking up when they go after him. This stuff is so sensitive. Willis and Smith need to be completely above board in their approach on these cases. The evidence speaks for itself.

What? Business fraud isn't serious? When you work in banking,  half of your time is avoiding massive penalties and jail.  Are you in that business? I am.  

No, it's not serious compared to the real crimes he committed. Trump doesn't work for a bank. He's not regulated like banks are. And this is a civil trial, not a criminal one.

This is making my earlier point, I think some people are under the delusion that Trump could go to jail over this. He's facing a monetary penalty. He can still breathe free air, he can still run for president. This doesn't matter. It's a silly distraction, brought on for political reasons. Again, I hate the guy, but that's the truth of it. We can abandon moral high ground to chase him, but we should at least be honest with ourselves when we do it. When you come at Trump with half-laid plans he wriggles free. The man openly organized an insurrection and tried to overthrow a vote. LEt's focus on that. Whether Eric Trump should understand GAAP after getting his MBA is fucking trivial. It allows people who want an excuse to dismiss the real wrongdoing to lump all this together as noise.

I don't like it. I don't see the upside, but clearly I'm in the minority.

I'll take putting him out of busines to start. Seem to recall FELONY charges in Manhattan pending.

At every turn this case has been described as Civil in nature.

Being held accountable is the thing. This  more than jail,  hurts his ego. THAT is everything imo for this piece of shit

At the end of the day, when everything is said and done and regardless of the outcome, it’ll instil a sense of confidence in the justice system, as well as the NY business climate and, if POOTWH wins on appeal and everything gets tossed out, he won’t continue conducting business the way he does and he’ll know that the banks and tax authorities will be scrutinizing everything. That in of itself leads to others playing by the rules.

POOTWH’s whole MO is to push the envelope and dare you to try and hold him accountable. He expects everyone to roll over for him and look the other way. That ain’t going to happen anymore. And he brought all of this on himself by running for president and paying off a porn star. In the absence of those two things, and particularly the second one, it’d likely be business as usual and we wouldn’t even be discussing it.

The fact that his cult can’t understand the difference between civil and criminal trials and will mix all of them up into one big witch hunt is not an excuse to not enforce the law, particularly and regardless of how they come to the attention of the authorities or who the perp is.

JesseMcK

Yeah - hear all these points. In this instance, I would argue that they only pursued these charges because it is Trump. There is no victim here. The banks aren't bringing this case as some sort of show of damages that they were harmed. Like I said at the outset, no bank in their right mind is going to lend to an organization on the scale at issue here and rely on internally prepared financial statements for a valuation of collateral. They don't even do that with home mortgages. They're going to do their own diligence, and have third-party experts weigh in. How they set interest rates and LTVs are going to hinge on their own analysis and consideration of how valuable/profitable a relationship is to them. As another person point out, banks are regulated, and if they opened up the books to show half a billion of exposure to a single counter-party without any diligence on their part, they're going to be in trouble.

My concern, in a fractured country, is making sure the pursuit of a former president is above-board. Maybe that's Pollyanna-ish on my part. I don't know. We have real crimes that are much more interesting, and I do think it's important to try and convince as many people as possible that this guy deserves what's coming to him. 

But I'll step out of the way and let the normal business of this thread carry on.