|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 27, 2024 10:20:55 GMT -5
I don't understand why people can't comprehend that he can be both shady, and also be unfairly treated by the court system. They understand, they are pretzeling to defend political targeting of a politician they hate. The egregious fines in NY set a horrible president for potential investors in that state. And violates the 8th Amendment. Again, they both hate the Constitution and Trump so they are all good with it. I think O'leary nailed it in saying that this will likely, and should, prevent investors from wanting anything to do with New York. Ebb and flow. The NYC trend has been anti-success for a decade. The best are leaving, values will drop and other investors will take the risk in an undervalued market. The gamble is if the city/state can right itself. Too many arguments for the attack on Trump is based on ignorance of how this works. They see Trump, they hate Trump, that's all they want to know. Your business likely was similar to mine. A Line of Credit that had terms that could be renegotiated as the situation required. If I need a larger loan than the limit of my LOC, I have to go through another round of application paperwork. It is expedited as I have a record with the bank. The reality is, O'Leary isn't just right, he's speaking the truth for every property developer. Everywhere. And every bank knows it. |
|
|
|
Post by BuckysRevenge on Feb 27, 2024 11:54:39 GMT -5
I see you ignored most of what I posted. It isn't that he did it that drew attention. It's how he did it that differs from the rest. Oh, and does Trump have a stellar track record of paying back loans? Or paying contractors? I don't understand why people can't comprehend that he can be both shady, and also be unfairly treated by the court system. The egregious fines in NY set a horrible president for potential investors in that state. I think O'leary nailed it in saying that this will likely, and should, prevent investors from wanting anything to do with New York. I dont disagree with anything you say here. Those fines seem a little on the absurd side and will scare investors away from NY |
|
|
|
Post by BuckysRevenge on Feb 27, 2024 11:59:40 GMT -5
I see you ignored most of what I posted. Actually, I didn't. I'll itemize it it for you.... I dont know if you've ever tried to get those records, but it can be difficult at best. I have not. I suspect banks can get that info much easier than I can. News and legal teams can get FOIA easier than me. Cops can get arrest records easier than me. And once again, it's my understanding that it isn't that he overvalued his assets, its how he overvalued them and how much he overvalued them. Makes no (zero/zip/nada) difference. Trump can claim he owns Greenland and it's up the the bank to verify the claim or accept it. It isn't an issue for gov't. If Trump has trouble paying back his loan it will red flag banks who will scrutinize him more critically next time. It's one thing for a developer to take a property, look at comps and add 10% to the value of their property. It's another thing to take a property, ignore comps, and set an unrealistic value based on "plans" or "brand premium" or flat out false info about the property. If the bank agreed, they are contractually involved. You keep (continuing) to avoid answering if they should be legally liable for participating in the contract. It's how he did it that differs from the rest. Every contract, by simple definition, is different. They are never identical. Oh, and does Trump have a stellar track record of paying back loans? Or paying contractors? I have no idea. The banks are giving him top rate loans and are eager to do so again. That, to me, means they are satisfied by his loan history. You can tell them they are wrong if you believe differently. The records are not easy to get. I deal with developers virtually everyday at work. I also deal with property records everyday. I can't speak specifically for New York, but deeds are easy to get, and they are accurate as to the acreage of the parcel itself. Whet they don't have is an accurate accounting of the improvements on the parcel. Thats where the discrepancies can be wildly exaggerated. Oh, and Yrump businesses have filed bankruptcy many times, he has lost many lawsuits pertaining to payments to contractors. Hell, he has even lost housing discrimination lawsuits. Seems he checks all the wrong boxes.... |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 27, 2024 12:22:26 GMT -5
The records are not easy to get. I deal with developers virtually everyday at work. I also deal with property records everyday. I can't speak specifically for New York, but deeds are easy to get, and they are accurate as to the acreage of the parcel itself. Whet they don't have is an accurate accounting of the improvements on the parcel. Thats where the discrepancies can be wildly exaggerated. This I agree with. It's why they typically send out representatives to do an inspection. Depending on reputation and history usually determines how intense that follow up will be. Banks with a customer that has a record of paying loans on time will be more lenient than with a customer that has trouble with his payments. Oh, and Yrump businesses have filed bankruptcy many times, Yep, already adjudicated in the courts. he has lost many lawsuits pertaining to payments to contractors. Again, that was a disagreement in the satisfaction of the contract between parties resolved by a court. This case is where both parties were satisfied the contract was completed to the satisfaction of both sides and desire to work together again. Why am I having such a hard time getting an answer to the question- Why isn't the bank(s) being punished in this scheme to defraud someone? |
|
cwood
Sophomore
Posts: 4,982 
Member is Online
|
Post by cwood on Feb 27, 2024 12:46:29 GMT -5
The banks aren't being punished because they didn't provide fraudulent information.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 27, 2024 13:07:14 GMT -5
The banks aren't being punished because they didn't provide fraudulent information. They agreed with the information. They did so to make a lot of money using the information. They are an equal partner in the contract. Anybody smarter want to give it a shot? |
|
cwood
Sophomore
Posts: 4,982
Member is Online
|
Post by cwood on Feb 27, 2024 14:31:55 GMT -5
The banks aren't being punished because they didn't provide fraudulent information. They agreed with the information. They did so to make a lot of money using the information. They are an equal partner in the contract. Anybody smarter want to give it a shot? Lol this is why you don't have friends. The banks didn't commit the fraud they were the victims of it. The more intelligent argument to make would have been that the government might have issues on appeal proving there was a harmed party. |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 27, 2024 14:44:37 GMT -5
The banks didn't commit the fraud they were the victims of it. The more intelligent argument to make would have been that the government might have issues on appeal proving there was a harmed party. Lol this is why you don't have adult friends. If the banks were victims of fraud, they can bring a case on their behalf. If they were victims of fraud, they wouldn't testify they were pleased with the business deals with Trump and have a desire to do so again. While yes, the gov't case has big problems on appeal, that isn't the point we are discussing. The point is politically targeting the opposition. Hochul has already confessed this. Perhaps that's why everyone is hiding from the question. You should have followed their examples..... |
|
cwood
Sophomore
Posts: 4,982
Member is Online
|
Post by cwood on Feb 27, 2024 14:55:36 GMT -5
The banks didn't commit the fraud they were the victims of it. The more intelligent argument to make would have been that the government might have issues on appeal proving there was a harmed party. Lol this is why you don't have adult friends. If the banks were victims of fraud, they can bring a case on their behalf. If they were victims of fraud, they wouldn't testify they were pleased with the business deals with Trump and have a desire to do so again. While yes, the gov't case has big problems on appeal, that isn't the point we are discussing. The point is politically targeting the opposition. Hochul has already confessed this. Perhaps that's why everyone is hiding from the question. You should have followed their examples..... I'm sorry your hero is a grifter and habitual criminal but criminal behavior opens one up to criminal consequences. |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 27, 2024 15:26:05 GMT -5
Lol this is why you don't have adult friends. If the banks were victims of fraud, they can bring a case on their behalf. If they were victims of fraud, they wouldn't testify they were pleased with the business deals with Trump and have a desire to do so again. While yes, the gov't case has big problems on appeal, that isn't the point we are discussing. The point is politically targeting the opposition. Hochul has already confessed this. Perhaps that's why everyone is hiding from the question. You should have followed their examples..... I'm sorry your hero is a grifter and habitual criminal but criminal behavior opens one up to criminal consequences. You should have hauled ass before humiliating your self.... |
|
ron
Sophomore
Posts: 2,386
|
Post by ron on Feb 27, 2024 15:36:13 GMT -5
I'm sorry your hero is a grifter and habitual criminal but criminal behavior opens one up to criminal consequences. You should have hauled ass before humiliating your self.... This is how you respond when cwood destroys your arguments |
|
|
|
Post by Snerb on Feb 27, 2024 15:40:28 GMT -5
Lol this is why you don't have adult friends. If the banks were victims of fraud, they can bring a case on their behalf. If they were victims of fraud, they wouldn't testify they were pleased with the business deals with Trump and have a desire to do so again. While yes, the gov't case has big problems on appeal, that isn't the point we are discussing. The point is politically targeting the opposition. Hochul has already confessed this. Perhaps that's why everyone is hiding from the question. You should have followed their examples..... I'm sorry your hero is a grifter and habitual criminal but criminal behavior opens one up to criminal consequences. Dumb response.... expected, but still childish. The banks and financial institutions will always be first in court if there was fraudulent dealings...you know that (I think, I hope). Why were all those financial institutions silent? No one lost or was duped into losing money, literally no one. |
|
|
|
Post by Snerb on Feb 27, 2024 15:42:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Snerb on Feb 27, 2024 15:48:30 GMT -5
Trigger alert...
|
|
cwood
Sophomore
Posts: 4,982
Member is Online
|
Post by cwood on Feb 27, 2024 15:50:10 GMT -5
I'm sorry your hero is a grifter and habitual criminal but criminal behavior opens one up to criminal consequences. Dumb response.... expected, but still childish. The banks and financial institutions will always be first in court if there was fraudulent dealings...you know that (I think, I hope). Why were all those financial institutions silent? No one lost or was duped into losing money, literally no one. The Trump Org objectively committed fraud. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you think they should be punished for violating the law. |
|
|
|
Post by Snerb on Feb 27, 2024 15:59:23 GMT -5
Dumb response.... expected, but still childish. The banks and financial institutions will always be first in court if there was fraudulent dealings...you know that (I think, I hope). Why were all those financial institutions silent? No one lost or was duped into losing money, literally no one. The Trump Org objectively committed fraud. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you think they should be punished for violating the law. By definition, fraud assumes someone lost money and someone gained from that loss. Who lost money? |
|
|
|
Post by BuckysRevenge on Feb 27, 2024 17:03:08 GMT -5
The Trump Org objectively committed fraud. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you think they should be punished for violating the law. By definition, fraud assumes someone lost money and someone gained from that loss. Who lost money? Did the bank deny a loan to anyone based in part because so much money was tied up in a loan to Trump? |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 27, 2024 17:42:19 GMT -5
The Trump Org objectively committed fraud. No, they didn't. They conducted business the very, exact same way everyone does in hat market. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you support a Putin style gov't persecution of the opposition or you side with the Constitution. If it gives you comfort, Putin FanBoy, Ron is on your side...... |
|
eXiT
Sophomore
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by eXiT on Feb 27, 2024 17:43:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 27, 2024 17:49:12 GMT -5
Did the bank deny a loan to anyone based in part because so much money was tied up in a loan to Trump? No. But even if they did, as long as it didn't violate discrimination laws it's perfectly legal. With your background you already knew that. For example, Insurers may choose to only insure classic cars. That means no insurance for your Rav 4. As long as they don't deny insurance for your DeSoto because you are Jewish or Black, they're good. The bank can deny a loan on homes in high flood areas but not deny based on race. |
|
ron
Sophomore
Posts: 2,386
|
Post by ron on Feb 27, 2024 18:02:49 GMT -5
The Trump Org objectively committed fraud. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you think they should be punished for violating the law. By definition, fraud assumes someone lost money and someone gained from that loss. Who lost money? When did you become the legal expert? Silly me. I thought that Judge Engoron would be the legal expert. It’s a mixed up MAGA world where experts are dummies and dummies are experts, and you’re caught up in the rabble |
|
cwood
Sophomore
Posts: 4,982
Member is Online
|
Post by cwood on Feb 27, 2024 19:07:08 GMT -5
The Trump Org objectively committed fraud. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you think they should be punished for violating the law. By definition, fraud assumes someone lost money and someone gained from that loss. Who lost money? Banks that assumed greater risk than they were led to believe and who charged lower interest rates than an honest assessment would have allowed. |
|
cwood
Sophomore
Posts: 4,982
Member is Online
|
Post by cwood on Feb 27, 2024 19:11:00 GMT -5
The Trump Org objectively committed fraud. No, they didn't. They conducted business the very, exact same way everyone does in hat market. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you support a Putin style gov't persecution of the opposition or you side with the Constitution. If it gives you comfort, Putin FanBoy, Ron is on your side...... No they don't and before you quote O'Leary just realize he's lying. His businesses don't inflate assets 100-400% just as no legitimate business does. |
|
smd12
Freshman
Posts: 800
NFL: Bears
NBA: Bulls
NHL: Blackhawks
MLB: White Sox
College: ND
FIFA: Nah
|
Post by smd12 on Feb 27, 2024 19:52:15 GMT -5
No, they didn't. They conducted business the very, exact same way everyone does in hat market. This isn't even in dispute by any reasonable person. The only question is whether you support a Putin style gov't persecution of the opposition or you side with the Constitution. If it gives you comfort, Putin FanBoy, Ron is on your side...... No they don't and before you quote O'Leary just realize he's lying. His businesses don't inflate assets 100-400% just as no legitimate business does. How is he lying and what would he possibly have to gain by lying in this situation? |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Tinley on Feb 28, 2024 7:29:23 GMT -5
No they don't and before you quote O'Leary just realize he's lying. His businesses don't inflate assets 100-400% just as no legitimate business does. How is he lying and what would he possibly have to gain by lying in this situation? cwood just fucked-up (massively). He now clings desperately to his shovel. He and the Ron-Bot lack the ability to accept reality. And it's telling just how easy this is to understand. Still, they intensely fight it off. TDS has completely destroyed them. |
|
