The bank sent a letter when the suit was opened to cover their ass because this became public. Up until that point, they did nothing to claim they suffered a loss due to fraud. This is the same as someone enforcing a law that never gets enforced to prove a point. A circus comes into town at MSG and they temporarily tie a horse to a street sign until the truck can get out of the way. That is probably a violation (can't park that horse there based on a law that was written in 1812) but no one was hurt and no one would prosecute that violation. This is clearly bigger but the party that could have gotten hurt did not sue or charge fraud. This is huge government overreach by a Democratic prosecutor who announced to the world she was going after Trump and a Democratic appointed judge. Nothing more nothing less. I'm not saying I agree with Trump's business practices - but most people who do business with him know how he operates and they can choose to take the chance or not. That is what happened here and the bank decided to take the chance but they also had lots of opportunities to mitigate their risks which they did. $340M penalty is just ridiculous. Why would anyone want to do business in NY after this? And why people aren't upset about this ruling is that they hate Trump. It makes zero common sense. No party lost money here or was defrauded.
Trump is pathetic
- Thread starter SHUSA
- Start date
There are legal advantages and disadvantages to each like compelling testimony, standard of preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt. etc..
Because they did not have public information indicating fraud had occurred.
It. Was. Fraud.
Why are you excusing fraud? Shouldn't you want those who commit fraud, white collar or not, be held accountable for their fraud?
Cops give out traffic tickets all the time when no one is hurt.
Why do you think that is?
Why do you think that excuses fraud?
I guess you didn't look at Mr Wonderfuls post. This is an every day occurence for banks and they have to sift through the reality, make their own judgement and decide to play or not. That is what they did and they took the risk and most likely mitigated it and never got hurt. End of story. I guess you like public officials spending millions of tax dollars, running around leaving other criminals alone and using a political witch hunt to help them get elected to future positions. Wait to see what Leticia does after this in a Dem area. Is that fraud or misuse of government resources that she used this opportunity to better her future or did she use tax dollars to prosecute the most egregious crimes of which this is not one of them. You can spin anything any way you want but this was not a crime in that no one was hurt. It was heavily politically motivated. Not all the cases against Trump are but this one was for sure.
"What if everyone did that" is a phrase I use a lot.
What if everyone over inflated their assets, and everyone was paying their loans as agreed?
Everything seems fine until there is a blip in the market and all of a sudden collateral is not sufficient anymore?
It's just such a short sighted view to suggest that someone should get away with fraud because they got away with it. You have to penalize fraud or it creates an environment where everyone participates in fraud.
Speeding tickets incentivize people not to drive like idiots. Parking tickets incentivize people not to abuse parking spaces.
The penalty Trump is facing is not because of harm caused, but the harm that could be caused if everyone did the same thing.
pretty simple fraud. boo hoo for the mega real estate developers. they should all be fined too.
maybe this is the beginning. why make an example with trump? probably because the most vocal pompous ass about everything. great place to start
maybe this is the beginning. why make an example with trump? probably because the most vocal pompous ass about everything. great place to start
The idea behind the penalty is fine. If they proved that Trump should have paid X but paid Y, then the penalty being X minus Y plus interest would seem to be appropriate.
Government interference into private transactions where nobody is harmed is a scary slope. No thanks.
Government imposing penalties on laws which did not harm anyone yet have the potential to harm acts as deterrence for others.
Private citizens getting away with fraud to enrich themselves? No thanks.
Nice of you to weigh in after trashing all of the SHU players in the game thread last night....you should know something about being a vocal pompous ass....
Let me know when Leticia James goes after many more real estate developers in NY and brings the same case and then maybe I'll believe this wasn't politically motivated. Until then ...
Someone should bring their own suit if they were actually defrauded. In this particular case, there was no fraud as Deutsch relied on their own internal valuations.
This case was only brought because Michael Cohen testified to congress that Trump was fraudulently reporting his financials. Without that testimony, this case never happens.
To be clear, you think testimony like that should be ignored? The state should just let people violate statues? What kind of message do you think that sends to the rest of the business owners and developers in NYC?
Is insider trading ok? Acting on private information to enrich yourself is fine? No victim so it must be.
No injured party to sue you, so all is peachy?
Nope, much different, that is a criminal thing, ask our congressmen/women about all of that, they'd know. See Martha Stewart.
Insider trading can be both civil and criminal. Stewart faced both and paid civil penalties.
Not all insider trading cases have been criminal. The SEC has civil authority, not criminal.
For example - https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/lr-22059
So, since Marovitz had no victim and the SEC did not refer criminal charges - Marovitz should have gotten away with it?
Those market participants do not have an avenue for relief against an insider though, and that is as similarly theoretical as Trump's impact to Deutsche shareholders related to his interest payments to Deutsche which maybe should have been higher.
If it wasn't in Trump's interest, he wouldn't have been providing fraudulent data.
There should be a consequence of those ill gotten (whatever his advantage was) gains. We can't just allow rampant fraud because people may not get harmed.
I just think Deutsche bank has a responsibility to their shareholders, not the government. If DB brought suit, I would feel better about it. Also, what led to the monetary figure? Would be interested in that calculation.
I would disagree there. I don't think it is as cut and dry there and the government wouldn't have to consider the ROI of a lawsuit. Deutsche may not feel the time and expense of such a suit would be worth their time, and they'd have to consider the impact of their current borrowers getting pissed at a lawsuit against Trump and possibly leaving the bank.
It's interest payments he should have made minus interest payments he made, plus interest on that penalty.
And I agree with SPK, the government should not be setting terms of a transaction between two parties.
Unless DB demands that Trump have an independent party value the properties, it’s on them to do the due diligence and set terms of the transaction.
If you don’t agree with that, no need to keep going back and forth because I in no way think the government should interject themselves in that transaction.
I think that's a fair position to have, but I do disagree.
The government imposes a penalty for this type of fraud in order to discourage others. A case where a borrower gets to pay less interest due to fraud, while providing representations and warranties that the financials are materially correct, would just encourages others to do the same thing.
Martha Stewart was not convicted on insider trading. She was convicted and went to jail for lying to the FBI.
well our country has turned into a clown world
the media and filthy politicians have convinced that housewife you see on the treadmill at the gym to put stickers of Ukraine flag in their profile and worry more about a european border dispute than real issues going on in this country
we have an incapicated president as a figurehead while a cabals of ghouls run the show behind the scenes...media fails to pay attention even when a doj special counsel explicit says hello do something we have a real problem here
then i see posts in this thread even by republicans pearl clutching over Trumps comments..lmfao....people still buying the msm narrative..oh trump what a dictator nazi
But will they be? No.
And it's not because Trump's a vocal pompous ass -- he's been that for years. It's because he's polling better than the current incompetent in office.
There is pure political motivation behind these cases, and the fact the organization that was defrauded did not file suit speaks volumes.
you wanna know who is pathetic and crazy
be on the OTHER side of whatever these people are for. I cannot believe how many grown man are actually pearl clutching over Trump rhetoric about nato or anything else coming out of his mouth considering we had 4 years of peace in the world
be on the OTHER side of whatever these people are for. I cannot believe how many grown man are actually pearl clutching over Trump rhetoric about nato or anything else coming out of his mouth considering we had 4 years of peace in the world
Deutsche did not say they love him and want to keep working with him. They ended the relationship with Trump because of this issue in 2021. David Williams from Deutsche testified he would have recommended a default event if Trump fell below the required net worth threshold of $2.5 billion.
It's not just that the value was off, it was the constant attempts to lie and cheat throughout the entire process. They would provide false information, and hide information from their accountants. They would represent that the information they provided is accurate to Mazars, and then use the Mazars reports as reliable documents to Deutsche.
Trump got a lower interest rate than he should have because of fraud. I just don't understand why anyone would think that should go without penalty. It would just encourage others to do the same thing. If they get caught, who cares?
It's not just that the value was off, it was the constant attempts to lie and cheat throughout the entire process. They would provide false information, and hide information from their accountants. They would represent that the information they provided is accurate to Mazars, and then use the Mazars reports as reliable documents to Deutsche.
Trump got a lower interest rate than he should have because of fraud. I just don't understand why anyone would think that should go without penalty. It would just encourage others to do the same thing. If they get caught, who cares?
that’s fair, I’m less sold on the amount of the penalty than I am that there should be some kind of penalty.
The second point is also valid for sure.
