Trump half-billion dollar civil penalty thrown out by appeals court

[Lionfish]

And.


That is not what Trump did.

Trump went to court and filled out tax forms saying Mar A Lago was over valued at X million and they should pay less taxes on it, because it had no redevelopment as he had signed that away in a lifetime trust to not redevelop it for any other purpose. He then went across the road to the bank and said it was worth 10X based on him showing it with a redevelopment plan for the most expensive residential homes it had NO ZONING for and COULD NEVER get.

He also showed an undeveloped piece of property (7 Springs) as if it was fully built out with mansions on it and fully services when NO BUILDING had begun yet.

So when you sold your house for 10K more was it based on you lying to the buyer about what it was zoned for or lying to them telling them the house they could see out back (your neighbours) was yours too?

QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee,

1. Did the bank agree to the proposal?
2. Was the loan repaid on time?
3. Did the bank complain?

 

[QP!]

Listen, you retard. Trump asked for a loan.
The bank agreed to the terms of the loan.
The money was paid back on time.
No banks objected or testified that it was fraud.

I forgot,
Fuck you!

Irrelevant you simpleton.

Fraud happens at the time you submit fraudulent documents.

Full stop.

 

[Grokmaster]

Irrelevant you simpleton.

Fraud happens at the time you submit fraudulent documents.

Full stop.

Every buyer under estimates , every seller over estimates...which includes real estate.


It's not a fucking crime, except to ,soon-to-be indicted James.

Once again...WHO WAS DEFRAUDED?

NAME THE VICTIM(S).

 

[QP!]

QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee,

1. Did the bank agree to the proposal?
2. Was the loan repaid on time?
3. Did the bank complain?

Hey simpleton.

When the mortgage system collapsed in 2008 it was the TAXPAYERS who paid the cost which is EXACTLY why State AG's can and do prosecute documents fraud BEFORE things default, when they find it and they do not allow it to build up.

Also it is others getting credit or a mortgage or Insurance who DO PAY the cost of fraudulent mispriced loans in the system.

Meaning if Trump should pay 3X but only pays X due to fraud, others in the system are PAYING MORE for their loan or insurance due to how pooled risk works.

 

[QP!]

Every buyer under estimates , every seller over estimates...which includes real estate.


It's not a fucking crime, except to ,soon-to-be indicted James.

Once again...WHO WAS DEFRAUDED?

NAME THE VICTIM(S).

and THAT IS NOT what Trump did and what Trump did WAS A CRIME.

So again from my prior post. And see post above for victims.


-------------
And.


That is not what Trump did.

Trump went to court and filled out tax forms saying Mar A Lago was over valued at X million and they should pay less taxes on it, because it had no redevelopment rights as he had signed that away in a lifetime trust to not redevelop it for any other purpose. He then went across the road to the bank and said it was worth 10X based on him showing it with a redevelopment plan for the most expensive residential homes it had NO ZONING for and COULD NEVER get.

He also showed an undeveloped piece of property (7 Springs) as if it was fully built out with mansions on it and fully services when NO BUILDING had begun yet.

So when you sold your house for 10K more was it based on you lying to the buyer about what it was zoned for or lying to them telling them the house they could see out back (your neighbours) was yours too?

 

[Lionfish]

Hey simpleton.

When the mortgage system collapsed in 2008 it was the TAXPAYERS who paid the cost which is EXACTLY why State AG's can and do prosecute documents fraud BEFORE things default, when they find it and they do not allow it to build up.

Also it is others getting credit or a mortgage or Insurance who DO PAY the cost of fraudulent mispriced loans in the system.

Meaning if Trump should pay 3X but only pays X due to fraud, others in the system are PAYING MORE for their loan or insurance due to how pooled risk works.

QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, we can try again.

QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee,

1. Did the bank agree to the proposal?
2. Was the loan repaid on time?
3. Did the bank complain?

If you want, we can discuss GW Bush warning the country of how Barney Frank was mishandling Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and Frank's denial at a later time.

 

[QP!]

 

[QP!]

QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, we can try again.

QPeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee,

1. Did the bank agree to the proposal?
2. Was the loan repaid on time?
3. Did the bank complain?

If you want, we can discuss GW Bush warning the country of how Barney Frank was mishandling Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and Frank's denial at a later time.

That is irrelevant to the crime he committed LyingFish.

Do you admit Trump DID COMMIT the fraud he was charged with and that the question you are asking has ZERO impact on that being factual correct?

 

[Lionfish]

That is irrelevant to the crime he committed LyingFish.

Do you admit Trump DID COMMIT the fraud he was charged with and that the question you are asking has ZERO impact on that being factual correct?

I am not a lawyer. Perhaps our receptionist can chime in.
What I do know is that this is all bullshit brought up by a fat assed AG in NY that hates Trump. Without her, this would not have been a blip.
Hopefully, Trump will tie her in knots.
BTW,
Fuck you 2!

 

[T. A. Gardner]

ya but the problem is you are lying and wrong.

Yea, right...

There are victims of this type of fraud and i have proven this to prior with you losing on it.

Name them. Why weren't they the ones suing?

Bank rates, like Insurance pools, work based on group pricing and pooled risk, and when some people commit fraud to hide their true risk and get lower rates the other people pay higher rates to cover that improperly priced risk.,

The banks involved stated during the trial that they did their own due diligence, and that they were paid back in full under the terms of the loans made to Trump. So, how were they defrauded?

 

[QP!]

I am not a lawyer. Perhaps our receptionist can chime in.
What I do know is that this is all bullshit brought up by a fat assed AG in NY that hates Trump. Without her, this would not have been a blip.
Hopefully, Trump will tie her in knots.
BTW,
Fuck you 2!

Not only are you not a lawyer but you are not smart either.

Trump was not charged with speeding and was not found guilty of doing that.

Trump was not charged with what you are asking and was not found guilty of that.

What Trump WAS charged with, was a Civil Fraud for banking and insurance and HE DID do that and this appellate court affirmed the lower court ruling he did it was liable.

 

[QP!]

Yea, right...


Name them. Why weren't they the ones suing?

The banks involved stated during the trial that they did their own due diligence, and that they were paid back in full under the terms of the loans made to Trump. So, how were they defrauded?

READ

The fraud is committed when you submit fraudulent documents and not if/when they default.

Before 2008 the fraudulent NINJA loans being issued by Mortgage Brokers, despite not defaulting because constant rising property values allowed people to use the increasing equity to pay for them WERE STILL fraudulent even though the market was unharmed.

In 2008 with the housing downturn, those fraudulent loans blew up and crashed the market as the risk of them was mispriced.

This is what i explain to @T. A. Gardner but he is incapable of understanding, as to why MISPRICED RISK is the fraud and how it DOES have a cost even if the blow up or default never happens.

it is IRRELEVANT if the banks are ok with the fraud or if they get paid back. None of that impacts that fraud was done.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

That is irrelevant to the crime he committed LyingFish.

This wasn't a criminal case. It was a civil trial. Obviously, you don't know or care about the difference.

Do you admit Trump DID COMMIT the fraud he was charged with and that the question you are asking has ZERO impact on that being factual correct?

In my case, no Trump did not commit fraud, and James and Eragon didn't prove he did.

First, Eragon made the error of making up his own evaluation of the value of the properties Trump used for collateral saying that Trump's were grossly exaggerated. He and James had no way of knowing what they truly were worth, only an estimate, which the banks said under oath in the case they evaluated on their own and had their own assessments.

Then, James showed no harmed party. The banks, again under oath, testified they were made whole on the loans and satisfied with the repayment.

So, who were the harmed party? Not the state since they had no role in making these loans or their repayment. Who was harmed?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

READ



it is IRRELEVANT if the banks are ok with the fraud or if they get paid back. None of that impacts that fraud was done.

Your assessment is wrong. Fraud requires that the bank(s) accepted Trump's valuations at face value. They testified they did their own due diligence and offered the loans on those terms. So how was it fraudulent?

The banks further testified they were paid back in full. So, how were they harmed?

 

[QP!]

...

In my case, no Trump did not commit fraud, and James and Eragon didn't prove he did.

First, Eragon made the error of making up his own evaluation of the value of the properties Trump used for collateral saying that Trump's were grossly exaggerated. He and James had no way of knowing what they truly were worth, only an estimate, which the banks said under oath in the case they evaluated on their own and had their own assessments.

Then, James showed no harmed party. The banks, again under oath, testified they were made whole on the loans and satisfied with the repayment.

So, who were the harmed party? Not the state since they had no role in making these loans or their repayment. Who was harmed?

Who cares what your 'case is'.

A trial took place and a jury and judge found IN THEIR CASE that Trump did commit the fraud.

You reply 'but i Terry disagree...' is meaningless especially since you keep lying about the action that Trump did and what is required for this fraud to be committed and the finding to be established.

I have explained to you over and over that is IRRELEVANT if the banks want the fraudulent loans and IRREVELANT if the loans are paid back.

That has ZERO impact on this type of fraud and you are too stupid to understand that so you keep repeating the irrelevant thing.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The fraud is committed when you submit fraudulent documents and not if/when they default.

Like James and Schiff did in their mortgage applications? James' case against Trump hinged on the valuation of the property being used as collateral. Trump gave an estimated value. The banks estimated the value for themselves. Eragon offered an insanely low valuation during the trial. None of those are the true value of the property and all are not "fraudulent."

Before 2008 the fraudulent NINJA loans being issued by Mortgage Brokers, despite not defaulting because constant rising property values allowed people to use the increasing equity to pay for them WERE STILL fraudulent even though the market was unharmed.

In 2008 with the housing downturn, those fraudulent loans blew up and crashed the market as the risk of them was mispriced.

This is what i explain to @T. A. Gardner but he is incapable of understanding, as to why MISPRICED RISK is the fraud and how it DOES have a cost even if the blow up or default never happens.

You are incapable of understanding that in order for fraud to occur there has to still be a party harmed by it. The banks weren't harmed. So, who was?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Who cares what your 'case is'.

A trial took place and a jury and judge found IN THEIR CASE that Trump did commit the fraud.

You reply 'but i Terry disagree...' is meaningless especially since you keep lying about the action that Trump did and what is required for this fraud to be committed and the finding to be established.

I have explained to you over and over that is IRRELEVANT if the banks want the fraudulent loans and IRREVELANT if the loans are paid back.

That has ZERO impact on this type of fraud and you are too stupid to understand that so you keep repeating the irrelevant thing.

And now it's been tossed out.

 

[QP!]

Your assessment is wrong. Fraud requires that the bank(s) accepted Trump's valuations at face value. They testified they did their own due diligence and offered the loans on those terms. So how was it fraudulent?

The banks further testified they were paid back in full. So, how were they harmed?

FALSE AND LIE.

The Fraud takes place at submission.

If you go to 10 banks submitting some unzoned piece of land you own is actually zoned for high end condos and you apply for a loan with those fraudulent statement in the bank documents then EVEN IF ALL 10 BANKS REFUSE your loan and report you to police as suspicious you CAN be charged with this documents fraud.

You were refused, thus no bank lost any money, no harm was done and yet you can and will be charged and this is a very common charge.

You are so painfully stupid you will not get it and will repeat 'no victim' because as the "poorly educated" you simply cannot comprehend what you read.

 

[QP!]

And now it's been tossed out.

The FINDINGS OF FRAUD stand.

the money payment was thrown out due to judge error not because one was not warranted.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

FALSE AND LIE.

The Fraud takes place at submission.

If you go to 10 banks submitting some unzoned piece of land you own is actually zoned for high end condos and you apply for a loan with those fraudulent statement in the bank documents then EVEN IF ALL 10 BANKS REFUSE your loan and report you to police as suspicious you CAN be charged with this documents fraud.

You were refused, thus no bank lost any money, no harm was done and yet you can and will be charged and this is a very common charge.

You are so painfully stupid you will not get it and will repeat 'no victim' because as the "poorly educated" you simply cannot comprehend what you read.

That's not what Trump did, and you know it. Your example is irrelevant and just gaslighting.