Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 3 2024 03:53am)

So let's see if I've got this right:

1. Trump applies for a business loan.
2. Trump has his assets valued and provides that figure.

Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 13:51)

Missed a few things here.

Trump misrepresents his properties to have 3x the square footage, misrepresents how the land is legally allowed to be developed, and several others.

Those are pretty important facts.

If you intentionally misrepresent your property to secure a better loan, that's fraud. Nothing else after that matters.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 3 2024 02:56pm)

No they aren't, you're being silly.

These were private loans. Trump is perfectly fine listing inaccurate information)

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 3 2024 12:56pm)

No they aren't, you're being silly.

These were private loans. Trump is perfectly fine listing inaccurate information. The Banks perform their own analysis and make whatever offer they determine based on the valuation THEY conclude.

There was no crime here. There is no complainant, either. The banks were repaid, and would still be happy to extend Trump more loans. It's nothing more than a political hack prosecutor and political hack judge working together to steal Trump Tower and any other NY property Trump may have. Let me guess, next you're going to claim Mar-A-Lago is only worth $16m? You may be a liar, but you're not stupid. Try being honest every now and then. :)

Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 14:14)

Making a misrepresentation to get a better loan is fraud. Full stop.

This isn't something that's up in the air. It's just the legal definition

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 3 2024 03:19pm)

No, sorry, you're wrong. People put inaccurate information on loan request forms all the time.

It's very clear you've never worked for a bank. It just so happens I have. Loans with collateral don't work ANYTHING like you've convinced yourself they should.

The applicant gives whatever information they want to share. The bank views the information, then performs it's own valuation of all collateral offered. The bank then provides the offer.

The fact of the matter is that Trump could have left the descriptions of the property blank, and his estimated values of the properties as well and he would have received the same offer, with the same interest rate.

Once again, none of the banks came forward with any complaints or accusations. None. Zero. And they testified on Trump's behalf, as a point in fact. He was already a developer AND was backed by his father. They were tripping over each other to provide him a loan, he's the exact customer they wanted. And still want.

Like I said, try being honest from time to time. Ignorance is fine, but flat out lies grow tiring. :)

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 3 2024 02:26pm)

For reference the law is

"Under New York law, the five elements of a fraud claim must be shown by clear and convincing evidence: (1) a material misrepresentation or omission of fact (2) made by defendant with knowledge of its falsity (3) and intent to defraud; (4) reasonable reliance on the part of the plaintiff; and (5) resulting damage to the plaintiff."

All elements are met. The damage to the plaintiff is that the banks took on excess risk and so was deprived of higher interest rates they could charge or have required more collateral.

Quote (Landmine @ Feb 3 2024 03:29pm)

Who was the victim? Whoopsie

Quote (Thor123422 @ Feb 3 2024 02:32pm)

Did you not read my post? The victim was the banks that were denied higher interest rates and more collateral. Trump got a better deal as a result of his misrepresentations. This is a zero-sum game, where that means the banks got a worse deal as a result of the fraud.