NY Fraud cost will cost Trump over $350 miillion

[*pally*]

(02-20-2024, 10:33 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: What's the chances of this being pursued if it wasn't Trump ?

Virtually zero from what I've read.

You can ask the same questions about Hunter Biden.  Name any other person who has been charged with a gun violation like he was years after the fact?


Trump should learn to never piss off the person who buried your bodies.  New York didn't go looking for the crimes but once Michael Cohen handed them to them on a silver platter it is kind of hard to ignore.

Once they got into the paperwork, Trump's fraud was just so blatant.  Like with resumes and the speed limit, there is always a bit of fudge factor in real estate valuations but when it is just so far over the line,  like claiming his apartment in Trump Tower is 3x larger than it actually is, something could and was done.

[Luvnit2]

This case is the only case in NYC prosecuted without a victim. As I have said, it is money grab by NYC who is underwater due to poor management of their massive tax revenue. It makes NY and NYC an extremely bad place to develop real estate. The judge is from the LOWEST LEVEL OF THE NYC JUSTICE SYSTEM, A CALL IT A KANGAROO COURT.


While it is beyond the brief of this column to discuss it in more detail here, it does seem that cooperation by Bragg and James relating to their respective actions against Trump could potentially support a lawsuit by the former president under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1985 for violations of his constitutional rights.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/stalinist-370m-judgment-against-trump-vacated-immediately
Stalinist $370M judgment against Trump should be vacated immediately
The only way t[b]o restore confidence that New York will not destroy those with whom it disagrees is for the appellate tribunals to immediately vacate the judgment[/b]

This past week Judge Arthur Engoron of New York State Supreme Court, the lowest level of courts of general jurisdiction, levied a mammoth fine of some $370 million, including interest, against Donald Trump for purported fraud under a New York statute.

The term fraud is used loosely since no one was defrauded, an element of a cause of action under common law fraud, and no one was harmed, also an element, and there was no proof of reliance, another element. This is fraud "in the air," as the saying goes: no harm by no one against no one for no loss by anyone.

No one testified that they lost a penny from the purported fraud, or that they would not have wanted to deal with Trump as a customer. No one came forward to complain, except Attorney General Letitia James. But more about this modern-day Torquemada later in this
Previously, the same judge ordered dissolution of Trump’s businesses in the state, under the supervision of a receiver. That order was stayed by the appellate court pending appeal.

Following the order of dissolution, The Associated Press reviewed nearly 150 reported cases under the statute used to punish Trump and stated "that nearly every previous time a company was taken away, victims and losses were key factors. Customers had lost money or brought defective products or never received services ordered, leaving them cheated and angry."

Angry, although not a word to describe a single customer, is Trump, and he has every right to be. But it is also a word, along with outraged, that applies to a range of commentators, not all allied with the former president.

What is the potential impact of Trump ruling on New York businesses?Video
Professor Jonathan Turley called the $370 million judgment confiscatory, extreme and abusive. Professor Steven Calabresi termed it a travesty and an unjust political act. The subhead for his online commentary employed the term "Stalinist." Both law professors are right.

Because the judgment does not relate to any loss, the $370 million is not, properly understood, violative of the prohibition against grossly excessive punitive damages. It does fall, however, directly within the excessive fines clause of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In an opinion especially illuminating to understand the wrongdoing by the attorney general and Judge Engoron, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Timbs v. Indiana (2019), that the excessive fines clause is an incorporated protection applicable to the states (all of them, even New York) under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Supreme Court stated that the clause "traces it venerable lineage back to at least 1215" and the Magna Carta. "Despite Magna Carta, imposition of excessive fines persisted. The 17th century Stuart kings, in particular, were criticized for using large fines to raise revenue, harass their political foes, and indefinitely detain those unable to pay." These remain concerns.

As the Supreme Court stated in Timbs: "For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history: Exorbitant tolls undermine other constitutional liberties. Excessive fines can be used, for example, to retaliate or chill the speech of political enemies, as the Stuarts’ critics learned several centuries ago."

And excessive fines are a cheap source of revenue, in the case of Trump being a lot of revenue, especially for a state that has been bleeding population and high-income taxpayers.


The virtue of an Eighth Amendment challenge is that it places the political prejudices of the attorney general and the supine Judge Engoron relevant and front and center. James made getting Trump a centerpiece of her campaign for the post she now holds. All of her statements attacking Trump are now fodder for the inevitable appeal and attendant stay.

With this Stalinist judgment, it is no longer Trump who is on trial, but the New York state (in)justice system. Judge Engoron, New York’s version of the infamous Judge Ito, has brought the New York courts into disrepute.

The only way to restore even a modicum of confidence that New York will not destroy those with whom it disagrees is for the appellate tribunals to take immediate action to vacate the judgment in its entirety as bringing into disrepute the state’s courts. If the case survives even a day longer than tomorrow, Judge Engoron should be removed from the matter and replaced with a jurist who understands law and justice.

Finally, this is not the only case that New York prosecutors have levied against Trump. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has indicted Trump for what is almost universally condemned as a legally meritless alleged crime

While it is beyond the brief of this column to discuss it in more detail here, it does seem that cooperation by Bragg and James relating to their respective actions against Trump could potentially support a lawsuit by the former president under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1985 for violations of his constitutional rights.

Congress has the power to investigate the possibility of collusion by these two New York officials, and should do so promptly. They owe it to not only to Trump, but also to all of us, wherever we might live.

[*pally*]

The state and the people of NY were the victims with the loss of tax dollars. No different than a tax evasion case

As for a money grab for NYC...kind of hard to be a money grab, he case was brought by the state of New York and the money goes to their coffers not the city's

Trump was found liable for fraud. He doesn't dispute the underlying facts of the case, he just claims its ok to lie about the size of your buildings, the occupancy levels, the revenues collected, their level of improvements, oh and their actual value depending on who is asking and the whims of the responder.

Do you believe crimes should be ignored if committed by the rich and powerful?

[Luvnit2]

(02-20-2024, 12:03 PM)pally Wrote: You can ask the same questions about Hunter Biden.  Name any other person who has been charged with a gun violation like he was years after the fact?


Trump should learn to never piss off the person who buried your bodies.  New York didn't go looking for the crimes but once Michael Cohen handed them to them on a silver platter it is kind of hard to ignore.

Once they got into the paperwork, Trump's fraud was just so blatant.  Like with resumes and the speed limit, there is always a bit of fudge factor in real estate valuations but when it is just so far over the line,  like claiming his apartment in Trump Tower is 3x larger than it actually is, something could and was done.

Poor comparison, Hunter's case was protected by the F.B.I., D.O.J. and Secret Service Agency for years. They had the factul evidence and if not for 2 IRS whistleblowers Hunter walks free. They forced the charges (which he was going to plead guilty) to be treated fairly.

I love how you say they have all of this evidence, evidence given by a known liar who was guilty of committing perjury. 

I will go on a limb and say at some point, yes this could go all the way to the Supreme Court (refer to my recent post) this decision will be overturned and thrown out paving the way for Trump to sue NYC. 

In the meantime, a casual voter sees this fine as ludicrous and a money grab. Once again, Democrats could not help themselves and went too far. They won this case for now, but they lost politically big time. 

Every person regardless of party who was persecuted now holds Trump in a higher regard. They see the hatred of liberals like yourself for Trump. They see the contempt for rump supporters by the Democrats who promised to unite the country, but instead go after 74+ million voters personally.

[*pally*]

(02-20-2024, 12:44 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Poor comparison, Hunter's case was protected by the F.B.I., D.O.J. and Secret Service Agency for years. They had the factul evidence and if not for 2 IRS whistleblowers Hunter walks free. They forced the charges (which he was going to plead guilty) to be treated fairly.

I love how you say they have all of this evidence, evidence given by a known liar who was guilty of committing perjury. 

I will go on a limb and say at some point, yes this could go all the way to the Supreme Court (refer to my recent post) this decision will be overturned and thrown out paving the way for Trump to sue NYC. 

In the meantime, a casual voter sees this fine as ludicrous and a money grab. Once again, Democrats could not help themselves and went too far. They won this case for now, but they lost politically big time. 

Every person regardless of party who was persecuted now holds Trump in a higher regard. They see the hatred of liberals like yourself for Trump. They see the contempt for rump supporters by the Democrats who promised to unite the country, but instead go after 74+ million voters personally.

what legal reason would the Supreme Court have to overturn the case?  Trump doesn't dispute the facts.  He just denies that his lies equal fraud or conversely charging him was unfair.  Not once has he actually claimed that he didn't do it.

Casual voters understand justice is when rich people get charged with the fraud that helped make them rich.  It is only MAGA voters, who have abdicated any critical thinking skills to Trump and his media magaphones, who don't understand the fraud Trump was found to have committed. If I lie to a bank...I'm getting sued.  If lied about my building's income production to the tax appraisers I'm getting charged...why shouldn't Trump?

And yeah Cohen was a witness but unfortunately for Trump, his testimony was backed up by the paper trail found in the Trump Org, the banks, the accountants, and tax offices.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2024, 12:58 PM)pally Wrote: what legal reason would the Supreme Court have to overturn the case?  Trump doesn't dispute the facts.  He just denies that his lies equal fraud or conversely charging him was unfair.  Not once has he actually claimed that he didn't do it.

Casual voters understand justice is when rich people get charged with the fraud that helped make them rich.  It is only MAGA voters, who have abdicated any critical thinking skills to Trump and his media magaphones, who don't understand the fraud Trump was found to have committed. If I lie to a bank...I'm getting sued.  If lied about my building's income production to the tax appraisers I'm getting charged...why shouldn't Trump?

And yeah Cohen was a witness but unfortunately for Trump, his testimony was backed up by the paper trail found in the Trump Org, the banks, the accountants, and tax offices.

I just found out today that this case was a summary judgment.  A summary judgment is rarely issued and only occurs in cases where the evidence is overwhelmingly in one party's favor, making a trial unnecessary.  Unfortunately for you and others like you, this literally cannot be true for this case.  As one of your own posters cited, real estate agents in that area stated it would go for around $300 million for one agent to at least $600 million for another.  They also cited the possibility of a biding war, which absolutely happens (my sister got over $200k more for her first house than asking price).  Your retort to this would be predictable, that neither of those numbers is the $1 billion plus that Trump claimed.  That's true, but it's a damned cite larger than the $38 million the judge cited using property taxes as a gauge.  But guess what, property taxes frequently lag behind market value for real estate.  I'm paying far less in property taxes than my house would sell for, about half as much.

At the end of the day, the fact that Trump was allowed to call zero witnesses to refute the state's conclusion of his property's value on its own is ground for appeal.  I already showed you a clip from CNN of a real estate expert stating how crazy this case was, and what Trump did was business as usual.  As is typical you guys want Trump to suffer because you dislike him, and any evidence that even slightly casts him in a good light, or just not a bad one, is ignored, or condemned as the rambling of a MAGA cult member.  While there are certainly MAGA adherents who would meet the criteria for cult member, there damn sure is a few who meet it on your side of the aisle as well.

[*Nately120*]

(02-20-2024, 01:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: As is typical you guys want Trump to suffer because you dislike him

I admit it.  Also, I think it's just a half assed sort of way of pretending life is "fair" or that karma exists.  A guy who brags about getting away with criminal acts getting rung up eventually?  Fair or not, that's something a lot of people choose to see as fair.

We can play both sides of the fence and I can admit when Ted Kennedy got brain cancer or whatever killed him my first reaction was a scoff.  At any rate, if Trump weren't Trump he would have been in jail long ago, so if he can get away with stuff by being Trump I guess it is some sort of "fair" that he can get rung up for stuff he didn't do (?) for being Trump.

Life isn't fair, so as humans attempting to grapple with that reality we are reduced to being petty and petitioning the universe to punish people we think deserve it.  Trump had something he didn't want forced upon him, so let's just pretend that it is a sign that the karmic wheel has done a 180 on him, or whatever the hell people say.  So sure, if Trump is feeling what it is like to have someone force something upon you because they have the power and you don't I'd say that's fine with me, and maybe he will learn something from it.

Or not, he's free to respond to his dose of "what goes around" by doubling-down on being an irredeemable bag o' dingdongs.

[Belsnickel]

(02-20-2024, 01:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I just found out today that this case was a summary judgment.  A summary judgment is rarely issued and only occurs in cases where the evidence is overwhelmingly in one party's favor, making a trial unnecessary.  Unfortunately for you and others like you, this literally cannot be true for this case.  As one of your own posters cited, real estate agents in that area stated it would go for around $300 million for one agent to at least $600 million for another.  They also cited the possibility of a biding war, which absolutely happens (my sister got over $200k more for her first house than asking price).  Your retort to this would be predictable, that neither of those numbers is the $1 billion plus that Trump claimed.  That's true, but it's a damned cite larger than the $38 million the judge cited using property taxes as a gauge.  But guess what, property taxes frequently lag behind market value for real estate.  I'm paying far less in property taxes than my house would sell for, about half as much.

At the end of the day, the fact that Trump was allowed to call zero witnesses to refute the states conclusion of his property's value on it's own is ground for appeal.  I already showed you a clip from CNN of a real estate expert stating how crazy this case was, and what Trump did was business as usual.  As is typical you guys want Trump to suffer because you dislike him, and any evidence that even slightly casts him in a good light, or just not a bad one, is ignored, or condemned as the rambling of a MAGA cult member.  While there are certainly MAGA adherents who would meet the criteria for cult member, there damn sure is a few who meet it on your side of the aisle as well.

So, there is a little more nuance here than you may be recognizing. Not all of the case was a summary judgement. There was a part that was, but not all.

Quote:In a 35-page Decision and Order, dated September 26, 2023, this Court granted plaintiff summary judgment only on liability and only on the first cause of action. Simply put, the Court found that plaintiff had capacity and standing to sue; that non-party disclaimers and party “worthless clauses” do not insulate defendants’ material misrepresentations; that intent, scienter, and reliance are not elements of a stand-alone § 63(12) claim; that disgorgement of profits is an available remedy; and that the subject financial statements materially misrepresented the value of the Trump Tower Triplex, The Seven Springs Estate, certain apartments in Trump Park Avenue,40 Wall Street, Mar-a-Lago, and a golf course in Aberdeen, Scotland. NYSCEF Doc. 1531.

So the focus on Mar-a-lago is only a part of the conversation there, and in truth it needs to be taken into account that the property values fluctuate and are subjective. More especially, we can look at the part of the summary judgement that pertains to Mar-a-lago:

Quote:Donald Trump purchased Mar-a-Lago in 1985. In 1993, he sought, and obtained, permission from the Town of Palm Beach to turn the property into a social club (NYSCEF Doc. No. 900), and on August 10, 1993, he entered into a "Declaration of Use Agreement" by which he agreed "the use of Land shall be for a private social club" and that "[a]ny additional uses of the Land shall be subject to approval by the applicable governmental authority including but not limited to the Town Council of the Town, the Landmarks Preservation Commission of the Town, the Architectural Review Commission of the Town, Palm Beach County, the State of Florida, the United States Government, and/or any agencies under the foregoing governmental authorities." NYSCEF Doc. No. 915.

In 1995, Donald Trump signed a "Deed of Conservation and Preservation Easement" in which he gave up his right to use Mar-a-Lago for any purpose other than as a social club (the "1995 Deed"). NYSCEF Doc. No. 901. In 2002, Donald Trump signed a "Deed of Development Rights." NYSCEF Doc. No. 902. As part of granting a conversation easement to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Donald Trump agreed that "Trump intend[s] to forever extinguish [his] right to develop or use the Property for any purpose other than club use" (the "2002 Deed"). The 2002 Deed also specifically "limits changes to the Property including, without limitation, the division or subdivision of the Property for any purpose, including use as single family homes, the interior renovation of the mansion, which may be necessary and desirable for the sale of the Property as a single family residential estate, the construction of new buildings and the obstruction of open vistas." Id. In exchange for granting the easement, Mar-a­ Lago was taxed at a significantly lower rate (the club rate) than it otherwise would have been (the private home rate). NYSCEF Doc. No. 903.

From 2011-2021, the Palm Beach County Assessor appraised the market value of Mar-a-Lago at between $18 million and $27.6 million. NYSCEF Doc. No. 905.

Notwithstanding, the SFCs' values do not reflect these land use restrictions. Donald Trump's SFCs for 2011-2021 value Mar-a-Lago at between $426,529,614 million and $612,110,496, an overvaluation of at least 2,300%, compared to the assessor's appraisal. NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 769-779.

In an attempt to rebut the OAG's demonstration, defendants rely on the opinion affidavit of Lawrence Moens, who they purport is "the most accomplished and knowledgeable ultra-high net worth real estate broker in Palm Beach, Florida." Moens claims that "the SOFC were and are appropriate and indeed conservative." NYSCEF Doc. No. 1292 at 35-36 (emphasis added). The Moens' affidavit states in a conclusory fashion that because he believes "this unique property offers to an elite purchaser the unparalleled opportunity to own an exclusive and extensive family compound in the most desirable sections of Palm Beach... the valuations in the SOFC were reasonable and below my estimate for the market value of the property each year." NYSCEF Doc. No. 1435. Moreover, Moens opines that "[i]f Mar-A-Lago was available for sale, I am confident that in short order, I would be in a position to produce a ready, willing and able buyer who would have interest in securing the property for their personal use as a residence, or even, their own club." Id. at 29. Critically, Moens does not opine at what price he is "confident" he could find a buyer (although he opines separately, without relying on any objective evidence, that he believes that as of 2023 the property is worth $1.51 billion).

It is well-settled that: "[w]here the expert's ultimate assertions are speculative or unsupported by any evidentiary foundation, however, the opinion should be given no probative force and is insufficient to withstand summary judgment." Diaz v New York Downtown Hosp., 99 NY2d 542,544 (2002); see also Gardner v Ethier, 173 AD2d 1002, 1003-4 (3d Dept 1991) ("the expert affidavit is also inadmissible because it is conclusory and the views are apparently based to a great extent on hearsay statements from unspecified witnesses as well as upon speculations on the part of the expert"). Accordingly, defendants' reliance on the Moens affidavit is unpersuasive and certainly insufficient to rebut OAG's prima face case.

Defendants further imply that they may ignore the plain language of the 2002 Deed restrictions because they would likely be able to use the Florida judicial system to get out of their contractual requirements; they further assert that because they may successfully breach their contract in the future, they were not required to consider the restrictions of the 2002 Deed when valuing the property. NYSCEF Doc. 1292 at 48-51. This argument is wholly without merit. At the time in which the defendants submitted the SFCs, the restrictions were in effect, and any valuations represented to third-parties must have incorporated those restrictions; failure to do so is fraud. Assets values that disregard applicable legal restrictions are by definition materially false and misleading.

Accordingly, OAG has demonstrated liability for the false valuation of Mar-a-Lago as appears in the SFCs from 2014-2021.

Here the reasoning is laid out for the summary judgement as it pertains to Mar-a-lago and how the testimony related to the value. The case law for NY indicates that with an expert opinion, if it is speculative and without evidence, it is not something to be relied upon. So, based on the law, it would appear the summary judgement holds up. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2024, 01:57 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I admit it.  Also, I think it's just a half assed sort of way of pretending life is "fair" or that karma exists.  A guy who brags about getting away with criminal acts getting rung up eventually?  Fair or not, that's something a lot of people choose to see as fair.

We can play both sides of the fence and I can admit when Ted Kennedy got brain cancer or whatever killed him my first reaction was a scoff.  At any rate, if Trump weren't Trump he would have been in jail long ago, so if he can get away with stuff by being Trump I guess it is some sort of "fair" that he can get rung up for stuff he didn't do (?) for being Trump.

Life isn't fair, so as humans attempting to grapple with that reality we are reduced to being petty and petitioning the universe to punish people we think deserve it.  Trump had something he didn't want forced upon him, so let's just pretend that it is a sign that the karmic wheel has done a 180 on him, or whatever the hell people say.  So sure, if Trump is feeling what it is like to have someone force something upon you because they have the power and you don't I'd say that's fine with me, and maybe he will learn something from it.

Or not, he's free to respond to his dose of "what goes around" by doubling-down on being an irredeemable bag o' dingdongs.

As a guy who was the best witness for the defense of a career criminal because they were literally getting railroaded I'm going to 100% repudiate this position.  Life certainly is not fair, but that does not apply to situations in which human beings deliberately make it so.  Life isn't fair is a child getting cancer and dying in agony while Dick Cheney lives a long and healthy life. "Person X" getting dugout by the legal system but it's cool because they're an "a-hole" is not.  You either live your life with honesty and integrity or you do not.  You don't make exceptions because you don't like a certain person or group.

I've said it before, this thread is further illustration.  Trump enables truly ugly behavior in both his followers and his detractors, and I make no distinction between them in this regard.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2024, 02:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, there is a little more nuance here than you may be recognizing. Not all of the case was a summary judgement. There was a part that was, but not all.


So the focus on Mar-a-lago is only a part of the conversation there, and in truth it needs to be taken into account that the property values fluctuate and are subjective. More especially, we can look at the part of the summary judgement that pertains to Mar-a-lago:



Here the reasoning is laid out for the summary judgement as it pertains to Mar-a-lago and how the testimony related to the value. The case law for NY indicates that with an expert opinion, if it is speculative and without evidence, it is not something to be relied upon. So, based on the law, it would appear the summary judgement holds up. 

Thank you for the detailed response and forgive me for the short reply.  If this holds up then every single property developer and real estate agent in New York is a criminal.  You've utterly destroyed both businesses.  Also, I don't think this defense of the decision would pass Constitutional muster.  If you can automatically deprive the defense of making an active defense then you have denied them the right to a fair trial.  The decision literally reeks, extreme Trump hatred aside, and I don't see how anyone can defend this.

[*Nately120*]

(02-20-2024, 02:07 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: As a guy who was the best witness for the defense of a career criminal because they were literally getting railroaded I'm going to 100% repudiate this position.  Life certainly is not fair, but that does not apply to situations in which human beings deliberately make it so.  Life isn't fair is a child getting cancer and dying in agony while Dick Cheney lives a long and healthy life. "Person X" getting dugout by the legal system but it's cool because they're an "a-hole" is not.  You either live your life with honesty and integrity or you do not.  You don't make exceptions because you don't like a certain person or group.

I've said it before, this thread is further illustration.  Trump enables truly ugly behavior in both his followers and his detractors, and I make no distinction between them in this regard.

Listen, it's Trump's fault for making sure everyone on earth knows how much criminal shit he's gotten away with.  Trump isn't an a-hole, he's a flat-out sex offending criminal and he's a career criminal who thinks we are TOO NICE to criminals and we need to give them "speedy trials" and then execute them in public.  Hmm, this feels pretty good.  No wonder grievance politics gets people so amped up.

My response to me allowing myself to be a petty deplorable in regards to this would be along the lines of "Look what you made me do."  It's his fault for getting me so amped up about an iron fisted system pushing people into the meat grinder of "justice."  Having mercy upon the criminal is some weak-ass woke DA crap.  Trump and his fanbase should be so glad they converted me to the side of LAW AND ORDER.

(02-20-2024, 02:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The decision literally reeks, extreme Trump hatred aside, and I don't see how anyone can defend this.

God's plan.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2024, 02:17 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Listen, it's Trump's fault for making sure everyone on earth knows how much criminal shit he's gotten away with.  Trump isn't an a-hole, he's a flat-out sex offending criminal and he's a career criminal who thinks we are TOO NICE to criminals and we need to give them "speedy trials" and then execute them in public.  Hmm, this feels pretty good.  No wonder grievance politics gets people so amped up.

My response to me allowing myself to be a petty deplorable in regards to this would be along the lines of "Look what you made me do."  It's his fault for getting me so amped up about an iron fisted system pushing people into the meat grinder of "justice."  Having mercy upon the criminal is some weak-ass woke DA crap.  Trump and his fanbase should be so glad they converted me to the side of LAW AND ORDER.

You're a grown adult, no one can make you do anything except go to jail.  If I can testify in the favor of a known career criminal because in this instance he is not guilty then you can keep your integrity intact over Trump.  And I'm talking a guy I know, but cannot prove, committed a murder.  Integrity and principles are meaningless if they have exceptions.

[Belsnickel]

(02-20-2024, 02:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Thank you for the detailed response and forgive me for the short reply.  If this holds up then every single property developer and real estate agent in New York is a criminal.  You've utterly destroyed both businesses.  Also, I don't think this defense of the decision would pass Constitutional muster.  If you can automatically deprive the defense of making an active defense then you have denied them the right to a fair trial.  The decision literally reeks, extreme Trump hatred aside, and I don't see how anyone can defend this.

Some of these claims being made we just objective misinformation. There is no way around that when it related to square footage and the like. When it comes to the speculative valuation, if someone claims an estimate of over 2000% of the tax assessed value, I honestly don't know what else to call it than fraudulent and if any developer made claims to that level, I would say they are committing fraud as well. Yes, tax value lags market value, but over 2000%? That is an unrealistic speculation when the average tax assessed value is between 75%-85% of the market value.

[*Nately120*]

(02-20-2024, 02:21 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're a grown adult, no one can make you do anything except go to jail.  If I can testify in the favor of a known career criminal because in this instance he is not guilty then you can keep your integrity intact over Trump.  And I'm talking a guy I know, but cannot prove, committed a murder.  Integrity and principles are meaningless if they have exceptions.

I'm not saying he's guilty, I'm just saying of all the suffering in this world we ignore or enjoy Trump seems as due as any to be on the arse end of it.  I'm not testifying against him, but I can enjoy seeing him finally being on the losing end of a power differential.

This is another thing that is out of my hands, may as well enjoy it. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-20-2024, 02:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Some of these claims being made we just objective misinformation. There is no way around that when it related to square footage and the like. When it comes to the speculative valuation, if someone claims an estimate of over 2000% of the tax assessed value, I honestly don't know what else to call it than fraudulent and if any developer made claims to that level, I would say they are committing fraud as well. Yes, tax value lags market value, but over 2000%? That is an unrealistic speculation when the average tax assessed value is between 75%-85% of the market value.

I bought my house for $492k in May of 2020.  The house next door to me, with a smaller floorplan and old appliances (it was a very old couple residing there) recently sold for $810k.  The bigger the property the more this type of thing affects it.  If you have real estate agents who will testify they could easily get $600 million for it then your 2,000% claim is dust.

[Belsnickel]

(02-20-2024, 02:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I bought my house for $492k in May of 2020.  The house next door to me, with a smaller floorplan and old appliances (it was a very old couple residing there) recently sold for $810k.  The bigger the property the more this type of thing affects it.  If you have real estate agents who will testify they could easily get $600 million for it then your 2,000% claim is dust.

What was the percentage of the tax assessed value in both those cases? Did either of your properties have the kind of restrictive covenants on them that Mar-a-lago has? All I am saying is that there is a lot more to it than the talking heads are giving it credit for. We can all say what we want about the prosecution or James or whatever, but given the way the judge ran the courtroom I can't see any reason to think he was inappropriately applying the law in this case. Now, you mentioned standing up to constitutional muster, and maybe that is something that SCOTUS will hand him down the road. But that is his only option from what I see.

[SunsetBengal]

(02-20-2024, 02:51 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: What was the percentage of the tax assessed value in both those cases? Did either of your properties have the kind of restrictive covenants on them that Mar-a-lago has? All I am saying is that there is a lot more to it than the talking heads are giving it credit for. We can all say what we want about the prosecution or James or whatever, but given the way the judge ran the courtroom I can't see any reason to think he was inappropriately applying the law in this case. Now, you mentioned standing up to constitutional muster, and maybe that is something that SCOTUS will hand him down the road. But that is his only option from what I see.

In the situation with sites like and similar to Mar-a-Lago and there are restrictive covenants involved, typically all it takes is to apply for a variance and submit developmental plans for approval, and thus voting by the Zoning Commission.

[XenoMorph]

Likely will cost NY a lot more as businesses pull out

[SunsetBengal]

(02-20-2024, 03:14 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: Likely will cost NY a lot more as businesses pull out

How ironic is it that a State that is already hemorrhaging wealthy tax contributors in droves, and has already went to the length of offering 5 years of tax avoidance for people wanting to open new businesses in the State of NY, insists upon "punishing" a guy they don't like, simply for doing business?

[*pally*]

(02-20-2024, 01:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I just found out today that this case was a summary judgment.  A summary judgment is rarely issued and only occurs in cases where the evidence is overwhelmingly in one party's favor, making a trial unnecessary.  Unfortunately for you and others like you, this literally cannot be true for this case.  As one of your own posters cited, real estate agents in that area stated it would go for around $300 million for one agent to at least $600 million for another.  They also cited the possibility of a biding war, which absolutely happens (my sister got over $200k more for her first house than asking price).  Your retort to this would be predictable, that neither of those numbers is the $1 billion plus that Trump claimed.  That's true, but it's a damned cite larger than the $38 million the judge cited using property taxes as a gauge.  But guess what, property taxes frequently lag behind market value for real estate.  I'm paying far less in property taxes than my house would sell for, about half as much.

At the end of the day, the fact that Trump was allowed to call zero witnesses to refute the state's conclusion of his property's value on its own is ground for appeal.  I already showed you a clip from CNN of a real estate expert stating how crazy this case was, and what Trump did was business as usual.  As is typical you guys want Trump to suffer because you dislike him, and any evidence that even slightly casts him in a good light, or just not a bad one, is ignored, or condemned as the rambling of a MAGA cult member.  While there are certainly MAGA adherents who would meet the criteria for cult member, there damn sure is a few who meet it on your side of the aisle as well.

Amazing how you know more than the judge does.  The judge who has read every single solitary filing in this case.  Have you?  

Trump was required to respond to the charges in filings and responses.  Real estate experts on value don't help when your lies centered around the amount of square feet in the property, occupancy levels, and rent collected.  A building that is 50% leased is valued differently than one that is 100% leased.  A 30,000 sq ft apartment is valued differently than a 10,000 square foot apartment.  You can't value someplace like Mar a Lago as a private home because it is prohibited to be used for that purpose.  You can't subdivide the property because that is also prohibited.  Its only allowable use is as a private club, only open part-time, which extremely limits its value despite Trump's claims of $1.5 billion.  He can't even claim the "presidential" premium of the properties because he wasn't President when he committed these frauds.  It is meaningless what these properties may sell for today.  If his lawyers did a piss-poor job of convincing the judge that Trump had legitimate reasons to lie about salient facts about his properties then that is on them and him for hiring bad lawyers.  Bad lawyering is not usually an appealable factor.

There is no one here on the liberal side who falls into the cult definition.  There is no leader we follow blindly.  Every single one of us has criticized Biden and democrats at one time or another.  

Try again with your projection...it doesn't work here

Quote:According to the Cult Education Institute, there are specific warning signs to look out for when considering whether a group might be a cult. Cults are characterized by:

1. Absolute authoritarianism without accountability
2. Zero tolerance for criticism or questions
3. Lack of meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget
4. Unreasonable fears about the outside world that often involve evil conspiracies and persecutions
5. A belief that former followers are always wrong for leaving and there is never a legitimate reason for anyone else to leave
6. Abuse of members
7. Records, books, articles, or programs documenting the abuses of the leader or group
8. Followers feeling they are never able to be “good enough”
9. A belief that the leader is right at all times
10. A belief that the leader is the exclusive means of knowing “truth” or giving validation