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

mrussel1 · January 2024

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.

Anyone who thinks this is criminal are either stupid or not paying attention. But fraud is real and it's NY. They have the toughest financial rules in the country. I don't think the decision to defend the laws civilly or criminally should be decided on whether the breaks in other states are worse or better.

mrussel1 · January 2024

JesseMcK said:

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.

Please continue. It's good not to have an echo chamber.

So I've heard these arguments that "no way would the bank rely on Trump financial statements". But didn't they? If they did full independent due diligence then they would have all of that documentation to prove that the rates were market reasonable. That would be an easy defense for Trump.

Halifax2TheMax · January 2024

2023

JesseMcK said:

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.

The “harm” is against all the other people and businesses that play by the rules. Should someone who owns 3,000 square feet in SoHo be able to inflate the square footage by a factor of ten in order to get a larger loan amount and a better interest rate using the property as collateral? If yes, then there are no rules and the banking and real estate industries are chaos, eventually leading to a lack of confidence for investors and the public alike.

mickeyrat · January 2024

Deutche Bank isnt exactly an above board player. You think they want to open themselves up to further scrutiny? And FUCKSTICK sued THEM for not giving him more loans after they tried to deny him, saying they should have known he was a bad risk.,..... You'll note he cant secure funding here anymore. Moved to Europe and then further east to Russia with those dumb motherfucking sons of his bragging about that shit.

JesseMcK · January 2024

Haha - OK, keep reeling me back in. I will have to drop off at some point, but this is the background/baggage I'm bringing here - I've spent the last 12 years working in community development finance. The first five of those were working on large infrastructure financings, in some cases over $100MM. Our non-profit would be involved because we would sell tax credits to large banks and bring in cheap mezzanine (low collateral, usually expensive capital) to the stack. I saw way, way behind the curtain on what a large bank's diligence looks like. It's not commercial real estate, but it is up to $500K in legal and accounting expertise to help them vet these transactions. Granted the modeling in our transaction was a little more complicated because of the tax credit, but these are highly sophisticated groups, using highly paid white shoe firms to keep them out of trouble. There is no chance that they would make a loan the size of the ones they made to the Trump Organization without understanding the collateral that was being pledged to them. They are not co-conspirators in this. Their balance sheet is scrutinized by regulators and if they're under collateralized, they're going to have to increase their level of reserves, which costs them money. Everyone's eyes are wide open. They're looking at tax returns, they're looking at audited financial statements, and they're having professional appraisals done.

Banks can charge as little as they want. There is no sliding, well Trump gets this interest rate so I should get this, scale. These are not government entities. And if that's the way the world should operate then it should be the banks facing penalties, because the fraud would be on them. No tax revenue was lost to the state. Banks aren't charging less money than they can get away with on purpose. The tax rate is not 100%, they're well incentivized to squeeze all the profit they can out of a transaction.

Did the Trump Organization lie on a balance sheet? Probably, yes. Did that have any negative impact on anyone? No, I can't get there. It's not reasonable. This guy is the scum of the earth, almost literally, let's not get dragged down into the bullshit games he likes to play in. They swung and missed at him on Russia, and on Ukraine. They should have impeached him after Jan. 6th. He gets free because people aren't coming correct with all their shit wrapped up. Let's do it, and let's do it right. That's all I'm saying.

Halifax2TheMax · January 2024

2023

JesseMcK said:

Haha - OK, keep reeling me back in. I will have to drop off at some point, but this is the background/baggage I'm bringing here - I've spent the last 12 years working in community development finance. The first five of those were working on large infrastructure financings, in some cases over $100MM. Our non-profit would be involved because we would sell tax credits to large banks and bring in cheap mezzanine (low collateral, usually expensive capital) to the stack. I saw way, way behind the curtain on what a large bank's diligence looks like. It's not commercial real estate, but it is up to $500K in legal and accounting expertise to help them vet these transactions. Granted the modeling in our transaction was a little more complicated because of the tax credit, but these are highly sophisticated groups, using highly paid white shoe firms to keep them out of trouble. There is no chance that they would make a loan the size of the ones they made to the Trump Organization without understanding the collateral that was being pledged to them. They are not co-conspirators in this. Their balance sheet is scrutinized by regulators and if they're under collateralized, they're going to have to increase their level of reserves, which costs them money. Everyone's eyes are wide open. They're looking at tax returns, they're looking at audited financial statements, and they're having professional appraisals done.

Banks can charge as little as they want. There is no sliding, well Trump gets this interest rate so I should get this, scale. These are not government entities. And if that's the way the world should operate then it should be the banks facing penalties, because the fraud would be on them. No tax revenue was lost to the state. Banks aren't charging less money than they can get away with on purpose. The tax rate is not 100%, they're well incentivized to squeeze all the profit they can out of a transaction.

Did the Trump Organization lie on a balance sheet? Probably, yes. Did that have any negative impact on anyone? No, I can't get there. It's not reasonable. This guy is the scum of the earth, almost literally, let's not get dragged down into the bullshit games he likes to play in. They swung and missed at him on Russia, and on Ukraine. They should have impeached him after Jan. 6th. He gets free because people aren't coming correct with all their shit wrapped up. Let's do it, and let's do it right. That's all I'm saying.

He was impeached twice, once for 1/6. Repubs could have held him accountable and chose not to. The state certainly lost potential tax revenue if he had used the higher valuation of his properties on his tax filings as he did his loan applications.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I thought that when you signed a loan application and a tax return or filing, that you’re swearing under penalty of perjury that everything stated within is true and correct, yes? They even might mention the penalty as well, “up to one year in jail and a $5K fine” or something similar.

JesseMcK · January 2024

Halifax2TheMax said:

JesseMcK said:

Haha - OK, keep reeling me back in. I will have to drop off at some point, but this is the background/baggage I'm bringing here - I've spent the last 12 years working in community development finance. The first five of those were working on large infrastructure financings, in some cases over $100MM. Our non-profit would be involved because we would sell tax credits to large banks and bring in cheap mezzanine (low collateral, usually expensive capital) to the stack. I saw way, way behind the curtain on what a large bank's diligence looks like. It's not commercial real estate, but it is up to $500K in legal and accounting expertise to help them vet these transactions. Granted the modeling in our transaction was a little more complicated because of the tax credit, but these are highly sophisticated groups, using highly paid white shoe firms to keep them out of trouble. There is no chance that they would make a loan the size of the ones they made to the Trump Organization without understanding the collateral that was being pledged to them. They are not co-conspirators in this. Their balance sheet is scrutinized by regulators and if they're under collateralized, they're going to have to increase their level of reserves, which costs them money. Everyone's eyes are wide open. They're looking at tax returns, they're looking at audited financial statements, and they're having professional appraisals done.

Banks can charge as little as they want. There is no sliding, well Trump gets this interest rate so I should get this, scale. These are not government entities. And if that's the way the world should operate then it should be the banks facing penalties, because the fraud would be on them. No tax revenue was lost to the state. Banks aren't charging less money than they can get away with on purpose. The tax rate is not 100%, they're well incentivized to squeeze all the profit they can out of a transaction.

Did the Trump Organization lie on a balance sheet? Probably, yes. Did that have any negative impact on anyone? No, I can't get there. It's not reasonable. This guy is the scum of the earth, almost literally, let's not get dragged down into the bullshit games he likes to play in. They swung and missed at him on Russia, and on Ukraine. They should have impeached him after Jan. 6th. He gets free because people aren't coming correct with all their shit wrapped up. Let's do it, and let's do it right. That's all I'm saying.

He was impeached twice, once for 1/6. Repubs could have held him accountable and chose not to. The state certainly lost potential tax revenue if he had used the higher valuation of his properties on his tax filings as he did his loan applications.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I thought that when you signed a loan application and a tax return or filing, that you’re swearing under penalty of perjury that everything stated within is true and correct, yes? They even might mention the penalty as well, “up to one year in jail and a $5K fine” or something similar.

OK - I'm done after this, I swear.

Do you get to tell the your municipality how much tax you should pay on the value of your properties?

Exactly right on the impeachment. That's my point. Especially the second one where McConnell and my senator in Maine wanted to pull the trigger but didn't. This stuff is a distraction from the real issues and they're political games our side is playing which make us look as bad as him. But maybe the stress of it will give him a heart attack and I'll come back here hat in hand.

benjs · January 2024

JesseMcK said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

JesseMcK said:

Haha - OK, keep reeling me back in. I will have to drop off at some point, but this is the background/baggage I'm bringing here - I've spent the last 12 years working in community development finance. The first five of those were working on large infrastructure financings, in some cases over $100MM. Our non-profit would be involved because we would sell tax credits to large banks and bring in cheap mezzanine (low collateral, usually expensive capital) to the stack. I saw way, way behind the curtain on what a large bank's diligence looks like. It's not commercial real estate, but it is up to $500K in legal and accounting expertise to help them vet these transactions. Granted the modeling in our transaction was a little more complicated because of the tax credit, but these are highly sophisticated groups, using highly paid white shoe firms to keep them out of trouble. There is no chance that they would make a loan the size of the ones they made to the Trump Organization without understanding the collateral that was being pledged to them. They are not co-conspirators in this. Their balance sheet is scrutinized by regulators and if they're under collateralized, they're going to have to increase their level of reserves, which costs them money. Everyone's eyes are wide open. They're looking at tax returns, they're looking at audited financial statements, and they're having professional appraisals done.

Banks can charge as little as they want. There is no sliding, well Trump gets this interest rate so I should get this, scale. These are not government entities. And if that's the way the world should operate then it should be the banks facing penalties, because the fraud would be on them. No tax revenue was lost to the state. Banks aren't charging less money than they can get away with on purpose. The tax rate is not 100%, they're well incentivized to squeeze all the profit they can out of a transaction.

Did the Trump Organization lie on a balance sheet? Probably, yes. Did that have any negative impact on anyone? No, I can't get there. It's not reasonable. This guy is the scum of the earth, almost literally, let's not get dragged down into the bullshit games he likes to play in. They swung and missed at him on Russia, and on Ukraine. They should have impeached him after Jan. 6th. He gets free because people aren't coming correct with all their shit wrapped up. Let's do it, and let's do it right. That's all I'm saying.

He was impeached twice, once for 1/6. Repubs could have held him accountable and chose not to. The state certainly lost potential tax revenue if he had used the higher valuation of his properties on his tax filings as he did his loan applications.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I thought that when you signed a loan application and a tax return or filing, that you’re swearing under penalty of perjury that everything stated within is true and correct, yes? They even might mention the penalty as well, “up to one year in jail and a $5K fine” or something similar.

OK - I'm done after this, I swear.

Do you get to tell the your municipality how much tax you should pay on the value of your properties?

Exactly right on the impeachment. That's my point. Especially the second one where McConnell and my senator in Maine wanted to pull the trigger but didn't. This stuff is a distraction from the real issues and they're political games our side is playing which make us look as bad as him. But maybe the stress of it will give him a heart attack and I'll come back here hat in hand.

My question is the same… if he wasn’t a politician, would he be pursued by the State of NY for the same supposed violations? If the answer is yes, how is pursuing the same way given that he IS a politician, a political game? If the answer is no, what would the state do instead?