Michael Cohen says he inflated assets to ‘whatever number Trump told us to’

[Danderman123]

12 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

So as long as Trump believed he could make Mexico pay for the wall, he was not lying, and if he believed his property was worth what he said it was worth, it was not fraud, and if he believed he won the election he should be acquitted. 

 

Thanks, I think we're clear now. 

The George Constanza defense.

[Danderman123]

14 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

Hunter Biden yadda yadda yadda

Go impeach Hunter Biden

[Danderman123]

14 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

All that proves is that they have been clever in concealing their crime.  As said, common sense tells you that Hunter Biden wouldn't receive the time of day for his efforts if he was not influence peddling his father.  

They have already uncovered over $20 million flowing to the Biden family.  

Now you pillary Trump for perhaps overvaluing assets but I see no public outcry against Hunter Biden who filed FALSE TAX RETURNS 

Links to the actual evidence of these payments, please.

 

Oh, you don't have them?

 

Sorry, someone is lying to you, and you are gullible enough to re-post the lies without trying to verify them.

[Danderman123]

On one side, we have Trump's case, where fraud has been proven.

 

On the other, we have Joe Biden, where zero proof has been provided.

 

A reasonable person would conclude that Trump committed fraud, but Joe Biden has not been proven to have committed a crime. But, some posters don't seem to be reasonable.

[Danderman123]

13 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

So as long as Trump believed he could make Mexico pay for the wall, he was not lying, and if he believed his property was worth what he said it was worth, it was not fraud, and if he believed he won the election he should be acquitted. 

 

Thanks, I think we're clear now. 

For the properties that Trump believed had high valuations, did he pay taxes based on the valuations he believed in?

 

Just checking to see how far down the rabbit hole you are digging yourself into.

[Danderman123]

On 10/29/2023 at 8:11 PM, Longwood50 said:

 

THE BANKS LOST NO MONEY AND DIDN'T FILE FOR ANY DAMAGE

Trump cost banks $168M by inflating his company's worth: fraud trial expert

[Danderman123]

Donald Trump Jr's testimony was a big nothing. He basically said he had no idea what was going on at the Trump Organization.

 

I believe him.

[Tug]

8 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Donald Trump Jr's testimony was a big nothing. He basically said he had no idea what was going on at the Trump Organization.

 

I believe him.

Dident the trump spawn (Jr trump) try to blame the accountant ?typical trump move try to make a flunky take the hit 

[Lucky Bones]

Judging by the headline, Trump & his offsider could easily slot into TAT🙃🙃

[Danderman123]

On 10/30/2023 at 5:17 PM, Longwood50 said:

No I have not moved from my position.  I said that the banks and I repeat that did not file a complaint.  

 

How could the banks file a complaint beforeTrump's fraud was proven?   The banks had no insight into the Trump Org's real books until this trial.

 

You don't seem to understand any of this.

[Longwood50]

2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

How could the banks file a complaint beforeTrump's fraud was proven?   The banks had no insight into the Trump Org's real books until this trial.

I am not sure I understand your particular level of lunacy but I admire your dedication to it. 

The bank would 'FILE A COMPLAINT'  Not any different than a person going to the police station to file a complaint.  A person does not wait for the police to prove someone robbed their home before they go to the police to report the theft.  DUH

 

The AG office is a prosecuting office not an investigative office.  No different than the FBI investigates crimes and the Justice Dept pursues them.  

The AG had absolutely no cause other than political persecution to search Trump records.  Not really any different than they don't have a reason to enter your home to search for illegal activity without cause.  

As I have repeatedly said, name one case, just one, where the State of NY has subpoenaed records of a person or company without the bank filing a complaint.  YOU CANT

That means they singled out and target ONLY TRUMP.  Whether the assets are inflated or not, New York can claim they are.  If this was a civil trial the bank would have to show damages which there are none.  But the government doing political prosecution is taking action where there has been no harm or loss.  

If doing so was part of a regular routine by the AG to seek out businesses and individuals that file false financial information with banks and insurance companies and Trump was discovered as part of that, and was found guilty.  My position would be different.  But it was not.  Trump and only Trump was investigated.  That sir is the eptiomy of weaponizing government against a political opponent.  Just like Stalin did to prosecute his political adversaries and just like Hitler did with his secret police. 

 

[Lacessit]

4 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

I am not sure I understand your particular level of lunacy but I admire your dedication to it. 

The bank would 'FILE A COMPLAINT'  Not any different than a person going to the police station to file a complaint.  A person does not wait for the police to prove someone robbed their home before they go to the police to report the theft.  DUH

 

The AG office is a prosecuting office not an investigative office.  No different than the FBI investigates crimes and the Justice Dept pursues them.  

The AG had absolutely no cause other than political persecution to search Trump records.  Not really any different than they don't have a reason to enter your home to search for illegal activity without cause.  

As I have repeatedly said, name one case, just one, where the State of NY has subpoenaed records of a person or company without the bank filing a complaint.  YOU CANT

That means they singled out and target ONLY TRUMP.  Whether the assets are inflated or not, New York can claim they are.  If this was a civil trial the bank would have to show damages which there are none.  But the government doing political prosecution is taking action where there has been no harm or loss.  

If doing so was part of a regular routine by the AG to seek out businesses and individuals that file false financial information with banks and insurance companies and Trump was discovered as part of that, and was found guilty.  My position would be different.  But it was not.  Trump and only Trump was investigated.  That sir is the eptiomy of weaponizing government against a political opponent.  Just like Stalin did to prosecute his political adversaries and just like Hitler did with his secret police. 

 

When someone says the floor area of an apartment is 30,000 sq ft when it is really only 11,000 sq ft to inflate the property's value, it's dishonest. When the higher value is used to obtain a loan from a bank, it's fraud.

Trump's legal troubles have nothing to do with weaponisation of the legal system, the mantra of his supporters. It's everything to do with the fact he's a crook.

 Orders of magnitude more than Nixon.

BTW, the noun you butchered is spelled EPITOME.

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

When someone says the floor area of an apartment is 30,000 sq ft when it is really only 11,000 sq ft to inflate the property's value, it's dishonest. When the higher value is used to obtain a loan from a bank, it's fraud.

Trump's legal troubles have nothing to do with weaponisation of the legal system, the mantra of his supporters. It's everything to do with the fact he's a crook.

 Orders of magnitude more than Nixon.

BTW, the noun you butchered is spelled EPITOME.

Did you mean to say weaponization? 

[Lacessit]

12 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Did you mean to say weaponization? 

Either the "S" or the "Z" is equally acceptable spelling.

 

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Did you mean to say weaponization? 

/ˌwepənəˈzeɪʃn/ (British English also weaponisation) [uncountable] the act of making something suitable for use as a weapon.

https://www.google.com/search?q=weaponisation&oq=weaponisation&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDUxNDhqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

/ˌwepənəˈzeɪʃn/ (British English also weaponisation) [uncountable] the act of making something suitable for use as a weapon.

https://www.google.com/search?q=weaponisation&oq=weaponisation&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDUxNDhqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Oh, you mean like Biden's DOJ. got it, thanks! 

[Yellowtail]

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Either the "S" or the "Z" is equally acceptable spelling.

 

My apologiez

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Oh, you mean like Biden's DOJ. got it, thanks! 

You've got less than nothing. Well, except your obsession with Biden.

[rudi49jr]

35 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You've got less than nothing. Well, except your obsession with Biden.

Unfortunately, he’s by far not the only one. The MAGA mind works in mysterious ways. On the one hand, all the overwhelming evidence against Trump and his co-conspirators is disqualified as ‘fake’ or ‘weaponization of Biden’s DOJ’. On the other hand, all the really fake evidence (since there is none, so they have to make it up) against Biden is swallowed line, hook and sinker. Talk about your cult…

[rudi49jr]

35 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

My apologiez

How old are you? Like, 12 or something?

[rudi49jr]

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Interested in twelve-year-olds? 

Maybe you should give the baiting a rest. It’s getting old.

[Danderman123]

19 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

I am not sure I understand your particular level of lunacy but I admire your dedication to it. 

The bank would 'FILE A COMPLAINT'  Not any different than a person going to the police station to file a complaint.  A person does not wait for the police to prove someone robbed their home before they go to the police to report the theft.  DUH

 

You don't understand how any of this works.

 

When a bank receives fraudulent documents, how can they know the documents are fraudulent? They don't have the Trump Org's real books.

 

The *government* eventually obtained the real books, and only after the fraud case was in process did the banks know the loan documents were fraudulent. So, the banks didn't file a claim because the fraud case was already in process.

 

You are grasping at straws that don't exist.

 

BTW, the current phase of the trial is to determine how much the banks lost via Trump's fraud. So, please stop claiming that no one was harmed by the fraud.

[Lacessit]

11 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

My apologiez

Apologies accepted.

I didn't realise American spelling had been dumbed down that far.

Have you been circumcised, or did the surgeon think the job was too big?

[Lacessit]

11 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

How old are you? Like, 12 or something?

I am sure he is quite mature - from the neck down.

[Longwood50]

49 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You don't understand how any of this works.

I am not saying you are ignorant.  You just have trouble with the thinking part. 

AG'S OFFICES DO NOT GO ON A HUNT THROUGH BANK RECORDS LOOKING FOR FRAUD. 

1. The government solely went after Trump.  They did not look at anyone elses records. 

This is the definition of weaponization 
“weaponization” appears to mean an inappropriate use of government resources to target people for unjustified partisan purposes.

Now you may not be able to see it but the Chinese government does


Now maybe you can comprehend this but I am not hopeful.  This is a check from Sara Biden to Joe Biden.  

If there was no check, no complaint, no reason to look at Joe Biden's account would you equally favor the Attorney General from a state, subpoening JUST THE BANKING RECORDS of Joe Biden to see if there was anything that the AG's office might use to bring criminal charges against him. 

[Longwood50]

15 hours ago, Lacessit said:

When someone says the floor area of an apartment is 30,000 sq ft when it is really only 11,000 sq ft to inflate the property's value, it's dishonest.

You still miss the point.  Irrespective of whether Trumps values were inflated THE AG'S OFFICE WEAPONiZED itself targeting only Trump

If the AG's office for whatever reason was conducting a broad investigation of bank fraud and uncovered Trump, I would agree with you.  However they did not.  They went soley after Trump's records

A prosecuting attorney's office does not go combing through records to find evidence of a crime.  They respond to a complaint from an aggrieved party.  The banks did not complain.  The AG went solely after Trump. 

 

[Danderman123]

2 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

I am not saying you are ignorant.  You just have trouble with the thinking part. 

AG'S OFFICES DO NOT GO ON A HUNT THROUGH BANK RECORDS LOOKING FOR FRAUD. 

1. The government solely went after Trump.  They did not look at anyone elses records. 

This is the definition of weaponization 
“weaponization” appears to mean an inappropriate use of government resources to target people for unjustified partisan purposes.

Now you may not be able to see it but the Chinese government does


Now maybe you can comprehend this but I am not hopeful.  This is a check from Sara Biden to Joe Biden.  

If there was no check, no complaint, no reason to look at Joe Biden's account would you equally favor the Attorney General from a state, subpoening JUST THE BANKING RECORDS of Joe Biden to see if there was anything that the AG's office might use to bring criminal charges against him. 

We are making progress.

 

Your claim that the banks suffered no loss from the Trump fraud has been debunked.

 

Your claim that the banks never filed anything against Trump has been dismissed.

 

Now you are ranting about weaponization of the NY AG office.

 

I will give you a clue: if you don't want to be prosecuted, don't commit any crimes.

[Longwood50]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

I will give you a clue: if you don't want to be prosecuted, don't commit any crimes.

No we are not making progress.  You still believe that it is OK for the government to target a specific individual and only that individual who happens to be your political opponent. 
 

The AG's office is a prosecuting office. IT IS NOT A BANK OVERSIGHT ORGANIZATION. 

It responds to complaints to parties who report a crime.  THE BANKS DID NOT COMPLAIN.  THEY WERE BEING PAID. 

I have said this numerous times and you stil don't seem to get it.  If bank was under some form of audit lets say by the Comptroller of the currency with a scope covering thousands of loan applications and reviewing financial statements given to the bank to determine if the bank was making sound loans.  If during the course of their audit, they came acroos Trump and it was found that he inflated values, it would be ok for charges to be brought. 

1. The banks are federally chartered and charges would be brought by the federal not state government

2. And read this several times because you still don't get it.  The AG of New York hates Trump.  She did not look at any other loan applicant, or review the documents of any other borrower.  THAT IS TARGETING AND USING YOUR OFFICE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES

The Chinese government even recognized it as such.  

It is said it is impossible to argue with a person who has renounced commons sense. 

Your hatred of Donald Trump has led you to believe that somehow the ends justify the means. 

PS I would say the same thing if the situation was reversed and a partisan AG's office only looked at Joe Biden's records found something they thought was illegal and brought charges. 

That is turning the USA into a police state not different than Stalin, or Hitler. 

[Danderman123]

41 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

No we are not making progress.  You still believe that it is OK for the government to target a specific individual and only that individual who happens to be your political opponent. 
 

The AG's office is a prosecuting office. IT IS NOT A BANK OVERSIGHT ORGANIZATION. 

It responds to complaints to parties who report a crime.  THE BANKS DID NOT COMPLAIN.  THEY WERE BEING PAID. 

I have said this numerous times and you stil don't seem to get it.  If bank was under some form of audit lets say by the Comptroller of the currency with a scope covering thousands of loan applications and reviewing financial statements given to the bank to determine if the bank was making sound loans.  If during the course of their audit, they came acroos Trump and it was found that he inflated values, it would be ok for charges to be brought. 

1. The banks are federally chartered and charges would be brought by the federal not state government

2. And read this several times because you still don't get it.  The AG of New York hates Trump.  She did not look at any other loan applicant, or review the documents of any other borrower.  THAT IS TARGETING AND USING YOUR OFFICE FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES

The Chinese government even recognized it as such.  

It is said it is impossible to argue with a person who has renounced commons sense. 

Your hatred of Donald Trump has led you to believe that somehow the ends justify the means. 

PS I would say the same thing if the situation was reversed and a partisan AG's office only looked at Joe Biden's records found something they thought was illegal and brought charges. 

That is turning the USA into a police state not different than Stalin, or Hitler. 

If you don't want to be prosecuted, don't commit any crimes.

 

Nothing that you write changes the fact that the Trump Organization committed fraud.

 

More to the point, the fraud became publicly known before the AG filed the lawsuit:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_investigations_of_The_Trump_Organization

 

It would have been negligent for her not to file against the Trump Organization, once the Manhattan DA and the media publicized the Trump fraud.

[Longwood50]

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

If you don't want to be prosecuted, don't commit any crimes.

 

Nothing that you write changes the fact that the Trump Organization committed fraud.

As I said, using your logic

1. Have the police raid your home to see if you are doing anything illegal
2. Have the IRS deliberately go after a political opponent to review just his taxes
3. Have the building inpectors go after only the buildings of your political opponent
4. Subpoena only the bank records of your political opponents to see if you can uncover anything that might be used to bring charges
5. Have the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agency raid your home to see if you possess any illegal weapons
6. Have Medicare look at all the submissions of only your political opponents to see if you submitted any false claims

Bottom line, keep your political opponent so bottled up in audits, investigations, and court actions to pummel them into submission. 

You obviously lack the common sense to see the difference between there being probable cause to investigate a person versus engaging on a targeted witch hunt. 

Also you are supplanting the governements assessment for what the values are versus the bank that made the loan.

The bank is the one who made the loan and was comfortable with the valuations. 

 

IN NO OTHER CASE DID THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL SEARCH THE RECORDS OF ANYONE ELSE.  THAT IS USING THE GOVERNMENT TO CRIPPLE A POLITICAL FOE. 

Danderman, 

As said, your hatred for Trump has blinded you.  As said, even the Chinese government recognizes the actions by the State Attorney General as weaponizing.  

Be careful what you ask for, it might come true.  I am sure you would cry foul. If the State of Texas engaged in a targeted investigation focused only on Joe Biden and subpoenaed only his records.  Not investigating a reported crime but trying to determine if one was committed.