You're a lawyer. So the lawsuit in NY... the AG is the complainant, no? He borrowed money and paid back the loans. Even if he DID overestimate the collateral value... who is the injured party? It's bullsheit.

If you did what he did and got caught, you'd be convicted. It is not that he didn't not pay his loans back. It's that the misstatements induced lending rates insufficient for the risk (Fraud 101). That's how bank's/lenders make rational decisions and decide whether to make loans.

By analogy, you argument is the same as:What's the difference that he shot his gun at him because he missed.

And, how do you explain the tax vs. loan value discrepancies?

You know it. I know it.

In GA... same deal. It's lefties prosecuting the chief rival they absolutely know they will lose to if he gets to run again. That's why the full court press. They cannot let him run. He will win and they know it.

Wait for the trial and the evidence. You might be astounded what was done.

What is better under Biden, aside from no mean tweets? Anything? Yes, no Trump!

Nope.

MACS wrote:

Banks/lenders make rational decisions and decide whether to make loans by using 3rd party property or asset appraisals.

If I told them my Honda Accord was worth $200k would they loan me $200k with it as collateral?

HockeyDad wrote:

What's the matter? You didn't get an invitation again last year? I'll see what I can do...
In the meantime, go ahead and vote for your favorite, on-the-way-to-being-convicted, crook.

rfenst wrote:

All feelings. Zero substance.

You're fine with Biden because he's not Trump... even though he's ruining the country. Got it. Screw the country, I don't like the mean tweeter. Shit on the constitution... no mean tweeter. Prosecute your opponent like a 3rd world country... no mean tweeter. Collude with media and big tech... no mean tweeter.

Makes sense. [sarcasm]

MACS wrote:

Those lenders are too dumb to know when a capitalist is lying and taking advantage of them, so it's up to a wicked smart hard left partisan attorney general to show them they are being harmed and dish out some old-fashioned Jacobin justice in kangaroo court.

RayR wrote:

Have you even taken out a commercial or non-collateral loan in your life? Do you even know any commercial banker or institutional lenders/investors in commercial properties? Do you really think you know how banks relay work internally?

rfenst wrote:

Oh, so you want to change the subject? I'm not playing.
What does any of that that have to do with that hard left partisan attorney general with the permanent scornful sneer on her face whose only goal is to get Trump, cripple his campaign and ruin his business enterprises in NYS by whatever means she can contrive?

RayR wrote:

Banks/lenders make rational decisions and decide whether to make loans by using 3rd party property or asset appraisals.

If I told them my Honda Accord was worth $200k would they loan me $200k with it as collateral?

HockeyDad wrote:

You think he can escape the fraud proven by loan and tax documents that are wholly inconsistent? If you did what he is alleged to have done, you would go down for either tax fraud or bank fraud. Which would you prefer?

As to your car analogy, it fails. Look up what "fungible" means. It doesn't include differing values based on who owns them or what the owner "believes" they are worth.

And, if you wanted to take a loan out on a car and lied about your income and such when it came to financing the car, and they found out, do you think they would approve you for the loan? Short answer: No.

And, no, your collateralized condo is NOT 30k sq ft.- for example...

rfenst wrote:

You are ducking some things to justify this.

I don’t see any tax fraud charges that you say could happen.

As for bank fraud, Party A says I want a loan on this collateral, it’s worth this much. Bank B gets a 3rd party appraisal and agrees or disagrees. Bank B decided to make the loan or not make the loan.

The state is mad Bank B made the loan because it doesn’t like Party A.

HockeyDad wrote:

As is well known now, former President Trump is presently on trial in New York. The accusations are that he fraudulently inflated the value of his assets in order to secure better lending terms from banks and insurance companies.

What a laugh. And the latter isn’t a partisan observation. If readers doubt it, feel free to GoogleGOOG +0.7% “John Tamny” with “Donald Trump” to read commentary on him going back to at least 2009. Some was positive, some middle of the road, but the vast majority was negative.

Back to the lawsuit against Trump, it’s laughable on its face simply because Trump’s assets are never obscure. Think about it. He built a global brand called “Trump” by placing all things Trump on his various buildings, goods, services, etc. Regarding the buildings with his name on them, he wasn’t buying and/or building in Peoria or Pine Bluff, rather Trump was buying and building in the most major of major cities. Which means where he had and has assets there’s voluminous information and “comps” galore to check his internal valuations against actual market realities.

Consider also that because he’s Trump, everyone has a comment on what he owns. In which case any bank making loans to Trump could get all manner of rich and highly credible names in real estate on the phone to check Trump’s valuations. Not only do people in his space want to talk about Trump, those capable of analyzing his valuations are themselves always in search of financing for their own projects. To say that they would provide reasonable counters to Trump’s assertions in order to help banks they’re also courting is kind of a statement of the obvious.

More...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2023/11/09/you-dont-have-to-love-trump-to-laugh-at-letitia-jamess-fraud-case/?sh=393672793108