What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.65: I'm Just Here For The Lincoln Project Ads

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yeah when I read that I was like "so they thought the ruling was so stupid and so a waste of their time to hear that they wanted the world to know just how big a dumbazz you truly are!". Dearie is going to do the same thing when he ultimately destroys her ruling of even needing a special master.
 
Are they still pretending that the classified status even matters? Oh, right, it’s supposed to rile up his worshipers and continue the grift.

And faux pretends to know the rule of law, lol.

They are, but no one else is. The courts aren't even really because they are moving everything along super fast instead of allowing him to stall.
 
Well this is humiliating: https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1572966868763430912

JUST IN: Judge Cannon has responded to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals stay decision by striking aspects of her order appointing a special master.

Here are the parts she cut:

FdRN3p-XEAYEEJF

FdRN3p-WAAkKsAi


So, as a Holiday Inn fan what I am reading is she basically acquiesced and every argument the DOJ made for why she should have granted a stay is reflected in her amended ruling.
 
Judge Dearie is not wasting much time...

https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/...16122059739136

NEW: special master judge Dearie has proposed a schedule. So much for “slow” Dearie. Keep in mind, DoJ won its appeal so this doesn’t pertain to the classified docs, which they are now allowed to use in both their natsec risk assessment AND their criminal probe.

Trump's fight is dead on October 14th. Best part though:

FdR7oJVXEAM6PN-

Pay up or else!

More here: https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1573010332146171908
 
Last edited:
Also ordering Trump to specifically list which documents on the DOJ inventory of seized materials he considers privileged, and why. And which ones he considers his personal documents.

Also, which ones weren't seized from Mar a Lago, meaning, planted by the FBI.
 
It's a fascinating complaint to read. It's long, stretching to over 220 pages, but has lot's of interesting details in it.

One thing that is interesting is the nature of the fraud complaint, at least as described in the first quarter of the complaint.

When people think of fraud, people tend to think of things like the Madoff example. Madoff makes false statements, provides false documents, etc..., and as part of that he lines his own pockets with other people's money, and his investors basically lose everything they invested.

The AG seems to be saying that is not the same case here. This is not necessarily a case where any individuals or businesses or banks were harmed. To the contrary, it appears that in an effort to dodge this complaint, most of the loans and other lenders have been paid.

The basic claim of the AG is this: Trump prepared false financial statements by grossly inflating the values of property, used the financial statements to get big loans, then financially benefited from those loans. The AG acknowledges that the banks were all paid back. It is the AG's position that under NY fraud law, you don't need someone harmed by the false statements. It's enough that you benefited financially from those false statements.

I think that's very interesting. It's almost a victimless crime, but one by which Trump clearly benefited.

I haven't had time to read the last three quarters of the complaint, so I'm curious to see what the rest of the allegations are, including things like the tax fraud.
The victim my brother the bank according to the law, but other potential clients of the banks were also impact, and those potential clients negatively. Banks do not hold unlimited appetite for taking on loans, nor does the Federal Reserve allow it. So that book has a limit. Other people were impacted yet again by TFG’s lies.
 
The victim my brother the bank according to the law, but other potential clients of the banks were also impact, and those potential clients negatively. Banks do not hold unlimited appetite for taking on loans, nor does the Federal Reserve allow it. So that book has a limit. Other people were impacted yet again by TFG’s lies.

lookit
trump ain’t mookie’s favorite, but referring to him as The Fat Guy is just wrong… fatties have feeling too :-(
 
I haven’t really seen anyone say it, but I assume it must be the case that entering an inflated value onto the loan application, signing the form, and delivering it to the bank is a crime, in and of itself. It shouldn’t matter if the bank does its own appraisal and offers terms based on a more reasonable value. Just lying on the application should be a crime, regardless of whether anyone takes any action based on that lie.

If the bank corrects the value and offers the proper terms, then in that case it truly would be victimless, because TFG wouldn’t have gotten a more favorable loan than he “deserved,” but that should still be a crime, to my way of thinking.

Anyone know for sure if this is the case?
 
Last edited:
I haven’t really seen anyone say it, but I assume it must be the case that entering an inflated value onto the loan application, signing the form, and delivering it to the bank is a crime, in and of itself. It shouldn’t matter if the bank does its own appraisal and offers terms based on a more reasonable value. Just lying on the application should be a crime, regardless of whether anyone takes any action based on that lie.

If the bank corrects the value and offers the proper terms, then in that case it truly would be victimless, because TFG wouldn’t have gotten a more favorable loan than he “deserved,” but that should still be a crime, to my way of thinking.

Anyone know for sure if this is the case?
Nosing around I found this,

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/p...false-documents-qualify-him-five-years-prison
 
I haven’t really seen anyone say it, but I assume it must be the case that entering an inflated value onto the loan application, signing the form, and delivering it to the bank is a crime, in and of itself. It shouldn’t matter if the bank does its own appraisal and offers terms based on a more reasonable value. Just lying on the application should be a crime, regardless of whether anyone takes any action based on that lie.

If the bank corrects the value and offers the proper terms, then in that case it truly would be victimless, because TFG wouldn’t have gotten a more favorable loan than he “deserved,” but that should still be a crime, to my way of thinking.

Anyone know for sure if this is the case?

I think you are 100% correct on this. My guess is that if you fill out a fraudulent loan application and don't even get the loan, that is likely a crime.

But here is what's interesting about the NY case (and again, just due to some other time issues I still haven't gotten past the first quarter or so of the complaint.) It's a civil case, not a criminal prosecution, as I understand it. It can, and probably should lead to a criminal prosecution if the NY AG has the goods on him, but I think the present case is just a civil claim, trying to get money back from him.

Because it's a civil case, in most instances I think a party who claims fraud probably has to show a false statement that was made with an intent that the other party rely upon it, along with some damages.

But as the NY AG writes in the complaint, in terms of the government making the claim, they are not trying to recover money that was taken from someone (or a victim, so to speak), but they are asking for a "disgorgement" of what they say Trump gained from getting these loans, even if the banks were paid back in full. Sort of like a claim that Trump illegally profited from his act, and therefore he should have to give the profit he made to the state (not any bank or other "victim.")

The only reason I posted about it is that I just think that's an interesting claim under NY law, apparently.
 
I think you are 100% correct on this. My guess is that if you fill out a fraudulent loan application and don't even get the loan, that is likely a crime.

But here is what's interesting about the NY case (and again, just due to some other time issues I still haven't gotten past the first quarter or so of the complaint.) It's a civil case, not a criminal prosecution, as I understand it. It can, and probably should lead to a criminal prosecution if the NY AG has the goods on him, but I think the present case is just a civil claim, trying to get money back from him.

Because it's a civil case, in most instances I think a party who claims fraud probably has to show a false statement that was made with an intent that the other party rely upon it, along with some damages.

But as the NY AG writes in the complaint, in terms of the government making the claim, they are not trying to recover money that was taken from someone (or a victim, so to speak), but they are asking for a "disgorgement" of what they say Trump gained from getting these loans, even if the banks were paid back in full. Sort of like a claim that Trump illegally profited from his act, and therefore he should have to give the profit he made to the state (not any bank or other "victim.")

The only reason I posted about it is that I just think that's an interesting claim under NY law, apparently.

I think you are mixing typical common law tort concepts in with the statutory claim. You pretty much point that out yourself, I guess.
 
Such a Trump move (aside from actually paying the guy). In a documents dispute, picking a guy who could never conceivably be cleared to review the documents in question is……not 6D chess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top