Longwood50

Exactly. I bought a business some years ago. I had to get an independent certified appraisal done to establish the asset value and cash flow value of the business. On real estate, take yourself as an example. Do you get an appraisal on your home as a condition of obtaining a mortgage. One way or another 'THE BANKS FOUND THE VALUEATIONS ACCEPTABLE' It is only a biased politically driven prosecutor is somehow saying oh despite the fact the banks suffered no loss I view the asset values inflated and you committed a crime.

And so does this Judge have infallibility? Seems to me that 9 justices of the Supreme Court once ruled on Roe v Wade and decades later 9 different judges ruled that the other court was wrong. My point remains the same. The banks did nto file a complaint. A very biased Attorney General ignored looking at any other company or individual who similarly "may have" inflated asset values to obtain a loan and chose to take a State action despite the fact that the banks are governed by the federal not state authorities and the banks suffered no loss. PS. What are those properties valued at today?

As I have said, irrespective of whether Trump did inflate assets to secure loans THERE IS NO VICTIM. The asset values only become relative in the event they are repossessed and are worth less than the amount of the loan. Now the government is misdirecting you to look at the asset value at the time of the loan. WHAT ARE THOSE ASSETS WORTH TODAY. You keep focusing on if there is " a crime" I have said that the government is being weaponized against a political opponent. Did the attorney general of New York similarly dig into the records of the banks of OTHER INDIVIDUALS OR COMPANIES to see if they similarly filed false financial information without the bank filing a complaint. If they didn't IT IS PATENTLY CLEAR THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE "TARGETED" TRUMP" The attorney generals office could have scoured the records of all the banks and ask to review all the financial records of all the loans to see who else might have inflated values. THEY DIDN'T they went solely after Trump singling him out for prosecution. In the end irrespective of whether the asset values were inflated or not, the banks were not harmed, and they did not file the complaint. THAT SIR IS MALICIOUS POLITICAL PROSECUTION. Also the banks are typically Federally Chartered that is governed by the Federal Government. They are insured by the FDIC again a federal organization. Yet it is a states action not the federal government happening only in a Liberal State by and Extremely Liberal Attorney General POLITICAL PROSECUTION. PROSECUTING A VICTIMLESS CRIME.

Asset valuation fraud is common but where there is an injured party. I CHALLENGE YOU Name once time, just one time where Letticia James or the Attorney Generals of NY office has ever gone after a company for filing inacurate financial statements where the financial institution was being paid as agreed and there was no complaint filed by the financial institution. IF YOU CAN'T I REST MY CASE THIS IS PURELY POLITICALLY DRIVEN.

Yes and Hillary Clinton destroyed emails under subpoena Sandy Berger stole classified documents in his pants Bill Clinton lied under oath Hunter Biden lied on a federal form. It is selective prosecution purely politically driven.

This is nothing but the Stalinist regime deliberately taking charges that would not be brought against an absolute similar case. As a former banker I can tell you that even if the bank lost money, there would not be charges brought against the person for making any false representations. Trump like any other borrower tried to portray his assets in the most favorable way. He would have had to have submitted documentation to support those valuations. Now suddenly though the bank approved them, and is still being paid, someone after the fact is claiming the valuations were false. Sorry, not a single person in all my 34 years in banking with some of the largest financial instituions in the USA did I ever encounter a single person being prosecuted for inflating values on a financial statement. That would be punctuated where the bank was being repaid. They would have no damage and hence no cause.

That is "your opinion" The fact is that Trump may not be a perfect man. However as I have repeatedly said, if it were not political, there would be no trial. The banks did not bring forth any charges and to the best of my knowledge his obligations to the banks have been repaid as agreed. Using James Comey former head of the FBI when he let Hillary off the hook, he said NO REASONABLE PROSECUTOR WOULD BRING THE CASE. The crimes against Hillary were far more severe and far less subjective. There is not once chance in a billion that Trump would be prosecuted if he was just an ordinary citizen.

Since you mention the law, tell me how the law applied to these. The FBI says it found 113 classified emails that were mishandled "Contrary to her sworn testimony, Secretary Clinton sent and received emails that were marked classified at the time." – James Comey FBI Clinton's use of a private email system and a private server violated federal law, specifically 18 U.S. Code § 1924, regarding the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials, as well as State Department protocols and procedures ... The Clinton campaign previously had indicated that her personal emails were deleted before Clinton received a congressional subpoena on March 4, 2015. But the FBI said her emails were deleted “between March 25-31, 2015” — three weeks after the subpoena Now who did the government choose to prosecute for a what they perceive as a boastful representation of asset value versus actions that clearly were willful violations of the law. President Clinton admits he lied under oath about his affair with Monica Lewinsky in 2001 IRS criminal supervisory special agent Gary Shapley, told lawmakers that the Justice Department's tax division and the prosecutors handling the Biden probe viewed the deductions as "a slam dunk case" of tax fraud. Biden also made $18,000 in wire payments to another woman, using coded language to conceal the purpose of the transaction. Another payment of $10,000, labeled as a "golf club member deposit," was actually for a sex club membership. In April 2005, Berger pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material from the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

The FBI says it found 113 classified emails that were mishandled "Contrary to her sworn testimony, Secretary Clinton sent and received emails that were marked classified at the time." – James Comey FBI Clinton's use of a private email system and a private server violated federal law, specifically 18 U.S. Code § 1924, regarding the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials, as well as State Department protocols and procedures ... The Clinton campaign previously had indicated that her personal emails were deleted before Clinton received a congressional subpoena on March 4, 2015. But the FBI said her emails were deleted “between March 25-31, 2015” — three weeks after the subpoena Now who did the government choose to prosecute for a what they perceive as a boastful representation of asset value versus actions that clearly were willful violations of the law. President Clinton admits he lied under oath about his affair with Monica Lewinsky in 2001 IRS criminal supervisory special agent Gary Shapley, told lawmakers that the Justice Department's tax division and the prosecutors handling the Biden probe viewed the deductions as "a slam dunk case" of tax fraud. Biden also made $18,000 in wire payments to another woman, using coded language to conceal the purpose of the transaction. Another payment of $10,000, labeled as a "golf club member deposit," was actually for a sex club membership. In April 2005, Berger pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material from the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Now tell me how the banks were so hurt by any falsification of Trumps net worth versus outright lying under oath, falsifying tax returns, and stuffing classified documents in your pants and how those were treated. If Trump was not in politics using Comey's words, no reasonable prosecutor would ever bring the case. Using Comey as an example, there was a woman who lied under oath and was sent to jail her name was Martha Stewart. Guess who prosecuted her for lying. None other than James Comey. This is all political. You bring charges, no matter how far fetched or trivial and you keep your opponent bottled up in litigation.

I have used both the App and the desktop. You still end up with searches that include items that have nothing to do with the item you are searching for. Lazada is particularly bad in that it allows advertisers to post the exact same listing hundreds of times so you waste time filtering through the search.

As I have previously stated. This is a political witch hunt. The "injured" party would be the bank. They were not injured. They also should be the one to bring the lawsuit claiming fraud. They did not. Who did. His political opponents. This is like the IRS finding a taxpayer paid all of his taxes but had innacurate information on the returns that didn't impact the taxes due, then claiming a false tax return. The underlying premise of a fraud is that it causes people to lose money. A fraud with no victim not a crime. The valuations are subjective and they were accepted by the bank. The government now coming in after the fact and second guessing the bank is purely weaponizing government. If the bank was injured due to any fabrication in my opinion that would be different. This really is no different than when Hunter Biden was charged with making false statements on a gun purchase. Few if any are ever prosecuted. Biden was targeted strictly because he was Biden. Trump targeted strictly because he is Trump and he has political enemies.

Yes they are. And who made the valuations? People don't appraise their own properties. If Trump pledged assets 1. They had to be supported by outside valuations. 2. They had to be reviewed and approved by the banks lending officer. Still bottom line. The valuations are irrelevant if the debt was repaid.

I suggest my 34 years as an executive officer for major banks including Bank of America is a bit broader than yours. Basic Law an "injured party" brings action. If anyone was injured it was the banks. That would be who the "false statements" were make to. Did the banks bring the action or did Trumps' political enemies. Now if I say I own a piece of property and I did not own it. That is fraud. If I place a value of $10 million on it and years later you claim it was only worth $5 million and I committed fraud that is purely subjective. This is purely a case of poltiical vindictiveness. No bank brought any claims of not being paid by Trump and being injured by his financial statements. This is Stalinist.

No my statement was that "courts" are not infallible. Take the most recent case with Roe V Wade. The Supreme Court ruled that the prior Supreme Court was wrong. Judges are human and have biases. Go to a different judge and you would get a different opinion.

That is a false equivalent. A loan obligation is a promise to pay back period. So long as the debtor pays back to the lender, the underlying collateral is not an issue. As to the Judge. Yes and you could just as easily gone to another judge who would rule that it was not fraud. One only has to look at the OJ Simpson trial to know that the courts are hardly infallible or biased.

Making false statements is a crime. However the loan payments do have a bearing on it. Where is the injury to the bank? If Trump was not being persecuted because he is hated by the left, the bank which ostensibly is the injured party would not be bringing the action. This is purely political BS. The bank if the financial statements were false is also guilty of not performing its duty to verify. If you pull virtually any financial statement from any loan you can argue that it is not 100% accurate. As to valuations of buildings. They are all "subjective" The valuation can only be established at the time of sale. Further, valuations fluctuate wildly from period to period. When I was doing assessing valuations for accounts back in the 1980's huge blocks of real estate we deemed as worthy of "holding" for future appreciation. In truth we couldn't give those buildings away Texas oil crashed and building valuations were a joke because no one wanted them at any price. Today, those same buildings are worth hundreds of milllions. So did we the bankers make a mistake in calling those buildings worthwhile holdings. Pure subjectivity.

As I said, to the best of my knowledge none of the valuations being argued over today involve any loans not being repaid. As to the banks actions, did you ever hear of Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Creditors often find it preferable to continue to fund a struggling organization to get some repayment versus siezing assets. One way or another, the bank and as said, I was a bank executive for many years, you do not take customers financial statements at face value. If you loan money against a home, it has an appraisal. If you loan against business assets, they are appraised. If you loan against a car, it has a blue book value.

Both sites are bad. I think both of them have deliberately bad search engines designed to have you view items you have no interest in. I purchase a lot online and of the two, I prefer Shopee to Lazada. My biggest complaint with both of them, is they do a lousy job of monitoring fake sellers and removing them. A signficant percentage of time sellers advertise things they don't have merely to obtain your personal information such as name, address, email and phone number to try and scam.

Have you been reported to immigration. Sounds like you are someone who should be deported 🙂

This is such BS. I am a former bank executive. When financial statements are sent in to a bank for a loan they have to be accompanied by appraisals. You don't loan money against a building unless it is appraised typically by bonifide cash flow reports that supports it valuation. I personally have bought businesses and financed them. I was required to get the value of the business appraised and submitted as part of my application for the loan. Do you really believe if someone, anyone walked into a bank and said, hey look I have properties worth $10 billion dollars that the bank would not question the validity of them and take them the valuation at face value. Another point, to the best of my knowledge any of the loans that are being questioned are not in default. So irrespective of what those properties are worth how is the bank harmed. It loaned money and is getting it paid back.

Not my comment.

A couple of points. Is it those civilians who harbored Hamas and provided the location from where the missles were launched. Also, Hamas has shielded itself in Mosques, schools, hospitals, surrounding themselves with civilians in an attempt to evade being fired upon. Would you prefer Israel send in ground troops and have those civilians be human shields. War is an ugly business. At one time opposing armies wore uniforms and faced each other head on in battle. No longer. Everything today is a form of guerrila warefare where the enemy surrounds and cloaks themselves.

Oh really, and which part of the OP that says that Israel is at war and the reason for that war is the land do you have difficulty in comprehending.

It depends on your definition of an offshore account and what your nationality is. Most places will require you to be physically present to open an account. In certain countries like Panama you have to be a property owner to the best of my knowledge. British citizens would likely find it easier to open an account in the Bahamas, or Grand Cayman. My GF who is Norwegian but we live in Thailand was able to open a brokerage account in Singapore.

It all depends on what date you select to determine whose land it is. For 9,000 years BC the Jews occupied the land. An act of WAR changed that when Rome banished the Jews. The land was not claimed until 1517 when the Ottomans waged war and claimed it. So again an Act of War changed the ownership of the Land. That lasted for exactly 400 years until 1917. The Ottomans backed the Germans in WW1. Guess what, the Germans lost and Britain obtained the land again as An Act Of War. So the British have more right to the land than the Ottomans since both obtained the land via a spoil of war and the British more recently than the Ottomans. In my opinion the Jews have allowed the Palestinians to occupy that land and unlike the Romans did not level and banish them from the territory. However, when you start to have a population within that group that includes those that would launch 700 missles into Israel, I don't think it is an uncalled response to hunt down kill all those involved and destroy their weapons of war. One can point over centuries to maps being withdrawn and territories belonging to one country versus another. From a long term historical standpoint the land was Jewish. From a near term standpoint the Land was ceded to the Jews. Only for the period from 1517 to 1917 was the land Arab property.