d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Breaking News: Trump Committed Civil Fraud 3.4bil
Prev1565758596063Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Feb 3 2024 09:50pm
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 3 2024 09:37pm)
What does Weiselberg's tax fraud have to do with this case?

I'm sure you think you're making a brilliant case, but for a civil suit to be valid, the injured party must sue the party that injured them.


In New York one of the powers the AG explicitly has is to pursue repeated instances of fraud.

Took me two seconds to find that. Just googled "why can the AG bring a civil case in new york" and it brought me straight to the relavent law.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/EXC/63

Quote
12. Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal
acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the
carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general
may apply, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the
supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, for an
order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any
fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an
appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue
of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law
or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court
may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem
proper. The word "fraud" or "fraudulent" as used herein shall include
any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception,
misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false
promise or unconscionable contractual provisions. The term "persistent
fraud" or "illegality" as used herein shall include continuance or
carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct. The term
"repeated" as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and
distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than
one person. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies
recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state
official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject
to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law.


Amazing what happens when you're willing to just google things.




Also the wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Executive_Law_%C2%A7_63(12)

Quote
New York Executive Law ยง 63(12), sometimes called simply "63 12",[2] is a New York law that gives the Attorney General of New York broad powers[3] to investigate and prosecute cases of civil fraud.[2][4] Due to its broad definitions,[5] section 63(12) provides the AG with far-reaching powers to issue subpoenas, as well as low legal hurdles to do so.[6] The law was passed in 1956, while Jacob Javits was attorney general.[7][1] It was invoked in the New York civil investigation of The Trump Organization.


This post was edited by Thor123422 on Feb 3 2024 09:57pm
Member
Posts: 21,485
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 843.40
Feb 3 2024 10:11pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 20:50)
In New York one of the powers the AG explicitly has is to pursue repeated instances of fraud under the New York False Claims Act.

Took me two seconds to find that. Just googled "why can the AG bring a civil case in new york" and it brought me straight to the relavent law.

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/2022-08/nyfca.pdf

Amazing what happens when you're willing to just google things.

Also the wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Executive_Law_%C2%A7_63(12)


It doesn't change anything. Nothing at all. There is no victim, there are no damages, and it doesn't meet the 5 conditions for fraud, two of those conditions being damages and injury. And little letitia, who literally ran her campaign on "I'm gonna GET TRUMP!" during her "investigation" questioned the banks before attempting to sue. She sued in spite of them denying injury, damage, or fraud in any form. Hence, prosecutorial malfeasance. If the investigation says, "There was no civil damages and no victim" then there is no case.

As to the extra-legal power to bring civil suit that NY granted it's AG, that's an interesting one. The AG bringing this case when the Banks testified there was no fraud, they were not victims, and there were no damages can quite literally open her to being thrown out of office. The judge, as well, can be thrown off the bench. It should be interesting to see what the 2nd Circuit says, because again, if all it takes for a DA or AG of any given state to steal all your money and properties and void all your business licenses is find inaccuracies in a bank loan application, half the nation can be stripped of it's property rights now, today, without any criminal charges. It's quite the precedent. :)
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Feb 3 2024 10:13pm
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 3 2024 10:11pm)
It doesn't change anything. Nothing at all. There is no victim, there are no damages, and it doesn't meet the 5 conditions for fraud,


It changes that you don't need a victim to bring the suite.

It meets all 5 of the conditions very obviously.

Stay mad scrub. I've disproven literally every one of your contentions.
Member
Posts: 21,485
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 843.40
Feb 3 2024 10:24pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 21:13)
It changes that you don't need a victim to bring the suite.

It meets all 5 of the conditions very obviously.

Stay mad scrub. I've disproven literally every one of your contentions.


It changes nothing, and you've proven nothing. Let's rehash, since your memory sucks:

Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 14:26)
"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."


1. The claim of misrepresentation or omission has thready at best. An assessor provided MAL assessment. The assessor apparently didn't know about zoning restrictions. Not really a Trump problem. As to the square footage of his Tower Penthouse, include the square footage of the roof, it's nearly the 30K square feet claimed.
2. There's no evidence of knowledge about any falsehoods. Expecting Trump to remember a zoning restriction from 25 years prior to the loan paperwork after all the properties he'd purchased, all the businesses he was running, and his hit TV show? Nah, that's not a thing. As to the square footage of his apartment? Also doubtful.
3. You cannot prove he had intent to defraud. He's already paid back the loans in good faith, where's the fraud?
4. The "plaintiff" in this case, that the AG is suing "on behalf of" stated NO INJURY. NO FRAUD. Reliance means depending on their testimony to establish injury.
5. There were no damages to the "plaintiff". The plaintiff made it very clear they made their offer based on their own assessments, they were happy with the offer, and they were happy with the repayment.

I would give that you MAY have point 1. but 2-5 is all a hard no. And point 1 would more heavily implicate the Assessor Trump used. How they didn't find zone restrictions during their assessment is beyond me.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Feb 3 2024 10:51pm
Quote (InsaneBobb @ Feb 3 2024 10:24pm)
It changes nothing, and you've proven nothing. Let's rehash, since your memory sucks:

1. The claim of misrepresentation or omission has thready at best. An assessor provided MAL assessment. The assessor apparently didn't know about zoning restrictions. Not really a Trump problem. As to the square footage of his Tower Penthouse, include the square footage of the roof, it's nearly the 30K square feet claimed.
2. There's no evidence of knowledge about any falsehoods. Expecting Trump to remember a zoning restriction from 25 years prior to the loan paperwork after all the properties he'd purchased, all the businesses he was running, and his hit TV show? Nah, that's not a thing. As to the square footage of his apartment? Also doubtful.
3. You cannot prove he had intent to defraud. He's already paid back the loans in good faith, where's the fraud?
4. The "plaintiff" in this case, that the AG is suing "on behalf of" stated NO INJURY. NO FRAUD. Reliance means depending on their testimony to establish injury.
5. There were no damages to the "plaintiff". The plaintiff made it very clear they made their offer based on their own assessments, they were happy with the offer, and they were happy with the repayment.

I would give that you MAY have point 1. but 2-5 is all a hard no. And point 1 would more heavily implicate the Assessor Trump used. How they didn't find zone restrictions during their assessment is beyond me.


1. The misrepresentation is clear as day. 30k vs 11k.
2. He knew about the square footage. He had it built, lived there for like a decade, and is a real estate mogul. Square footage of your properties is the absolute most basic thing.
3. The fact every single mistake increased the value instead of decrease it paints a pattern of intent. Inferring intent is pretty easy when the facts are this clear and is the explicit job of the court.
4. The law does not require an injured party to bring the charge. The AG is explicitly empowered to go after repeated fraud.
5. There were damages. The banks relied on incorrect information. This has been established in court already.

Yeah I've debunked literally every point you've made. All of these are abundantly clear which is why liability was established by summary judgement.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Feb 3 2024 11:04pm
Member
Posts: 29,431
Joined: Mar 24 2011
Gold: 839.70
Warn: 40%
Feb 3 2024 11:06pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 22:51)
1. The misrepresentation is clear as day. 30k vs 11k.
2. He knew about the square footage. He had it built, lived there for like a decade, and is a real estate mogul. Square footage of your properties is the absolute most basic thing.
3. The fact every single mistake increased the value instead of decrease it paints a pattern of intent. Inferring intent is pretty easy when the facts are this clear and is the explicit job of the court.
4. The law does not require an injured party. The AG is explicitly empowered to go after repeated fraud.
5. Damages are not required. See 4.

Yeah I've debunked literally every point you've made. All of these are abundantly clear which is why liability was established by summary judgement.


Holy fuck bro your PhD is worthless.....Thank God it's not in law or political science(I hope)

For someone as intelligent as you your ability to be so pussy whipped against daddy Trump is phenomenal. It's like I'm watching Joe Biden doing backflips to dodge ice cream cones it's so surreal to me :banana:

I know people have mentioned it in the past but if you're already willing to lie to yourself to such an extent why not work for the Democratic Party? I would support you over Jen Psaki or Karine Jean Pierre in a heartbeat my friend.

lmk
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Feb 3 2024 11:11pm
Quote (SwamiVivekananda @ Feb 3 2024 11:06pm)
Holy fuck bro your PhD is worthless.....Thank God it's not in law or political science(I hope)
For someone as intelligent as you your ability to be so pussy whipped against daddy Trump is phenomenal. It's like I'm watching Joe Biden doing backflips to dodge ice cream cones it's so surreal to me :banana:
I know people have mentioned it in the past but if you're already willing to lie to yourself to such an extent why not work for the Democratic Party? I would support you over Jen Psaki or Karine Jean Pierre in a heartbeat my friend.
lmk


not an argument
Member
Posts: 29,431
Joined: Mar 24 2011
Gold: 839.70
Warn: 40%
Feb 3 2024 11:15pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 23:11)
not an argument


cd t4t :P
Member
Posts: 21,485
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 843.40
Feb 3 2024 11:26pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ 3 Feb 2024 21:51)
1. The misrepresentation is clear as day. 30k vs 11k.
2. He knew about the square footage. He had it built, lived there for like a decade, and is a real estate mogul. Square footage of your properties is the absolute most basic thing.
3. The fact every single mistake increased the value instead of decrease it paints a pattern of intent. Inferring intent is pretty easy when the facts are this clear and is the explicit job of the court.
4. The law does not require an injured party. The AG is explicitly empowered to go after repeated fraud.
5. Damages are not required. See 4.

Yeah I've debunked literally every point you've made. All of these are abundantly clear which is why liability was established by summary judgement.


1. LOL. It's a neat try. So now you've dropped the MAL assessment. You gave up on the attempt by the AG to dictate that MAL is only worth $16 million (that sounds like fraud right there). Now we're down to the Penthouse. So, a few minor facts for you: First, a penthouse suite in a high rise that has it's own roof access can use the roof for parties, storage, whatever else. That is USABLE square footage. It can INDEED be counted in the tally. But that's not even the biggest point. The #1 point is that Trump clearly didn't know the square footage of the Apartment. He gave constantly shifting answers to the press for decades. He does this when he has no idea, and wants to brag. The claim that he "misrepresented" the space on the apartment at all ONLY arises because he signed a document in 1994 approving some design or something. That document happened to have the square footage on it. Again, 17 years prior to the loan paperwork, he saw the square footage. MAYBE. MAYBE, like many successful businessman, he signed it and got back to work, taking no notice. But the best part about you outlining a footage dispute from a lesser property is that according to assessments, had it been 30K square feet instead of 11K square feet, the valuation difference is only ~$10-20 million. It would have had no impact on the interest figure provided by the banks, which is also irrelevant. Because the banks based their offer on their own valuation. It didn't matter what trump put on the form. At all.
2. Why would he know about the square footage of a 3 story penthouse apartment? That he had somebody else design and yet another somebody else build it is not under question. Why would he, personally, know or care about details like square footage? More importantly, why would he know or care about the square footage 17 years after the most recent time he'd seen anything that listed the square footage? You try to use the words "realestate mogul" like it has any bearing on a property he's had for decades and personally lived in and wasn't attempting to sell. He EMPLOYS PEOPLE whose job it is to know shit. And sometimes, as with the assessor, they know less than is to be expected. Again, billionaire businessman. With a cool penthouse in a big tower in NY.
3. What mistake increased what value? The banks all extended loans based on their own valuations. He was worth $2.4 billion. Where's the intent to commit fraud by listing what you think sounds correct? That's not how banking works.
4. There is no fraud. Nobody was defrauded. In order to prove he defrauded someone, the burden of proof is on the accuser. Those she claimed he defrauded all denied it. He has never been convicted of fraud criminally. And putting inaccurate information on a bank oan form is not fraud. This is why you need a victim. If there's no victim, there is no civil case.
5. Damages ARE required. See, this is the problem with everything you're saying. If nobody has been defrauded, and there are no damages, there's no basis whatsoever for a civil suit. Inaccurate information on a bank form is NOT fraud.

You've debunked nothing. All you've managed to do is talk yourself into a corner where everything boils down to, "You don't need an unlawful act for fraud, you don't need to prove intent to defraud, ignorance equals intent, you don't need anyone to be defrauded, and you don't need damages" and that's the most retarded thing. There are five REQUIRED elements of fraud. ALL elements MUST be met. Inaccuracies on loan applications are not fraud, sorry. The worst part is, once you get past the AG trying to claim a 300M-1B dollar property is worth $16 million, the fact that an ASSESSOR provided the assessment Trump provided with the loan application, all you're left with is the square footage of a penthouse. And the overall difference on total valuation from that change? ~10M. That would have had zero impact on interest rates, and was almost certainly given in ignorance.

By all means, keep it up though. It's interesting watching you attempt to justify the outright theft of $370 Million without any criminal conviction. I'm highly entertained. :)
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Feb 3 2024 11:31pm
Ah yes. Donald Trump, the guy who built and owned and lived in the apartment, cannot be expected to know the square footage of his apartment.

Instead of just accepting that he lied, they pretend he's basically brain dead and incapable of knowing even basic facts about his business.

Desperation is palpable.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1565758596063Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll