If the NYC democrat judge and DA unilaterally seize DJT's assets, they will be electing him....

[-lowcountrydawg]

The legal warfare being employed the last couple years has clearly backfired and benefitted Trump. That dynamic will reach another level if they use this absolute farce of a judgement to literally just take the assets of a political opponent. TV coverage of walking into banks and seizing accounts and documents of seized real estate alone will likely give DT a 5 point bump. The fact that this DA is bragging and tweeting about the interest that continues to accrue, and now Biden himself is needling Trump about these judgements shows that they literally can't help themselves - totally shooting their own cause in the foot.

Even if you believe Trump is the anti-Christ, if you value America and the fact that capital invests here specifically because we don't do shit like take the money of political opponents or unpopular companies - you should be rooting against this NYC DA / judge combo.

 

[celticdawg]

I don't think this is going to get more votes for Trump no matter whether the actions against him are appropriate or not. It is only strengthening his supporters and while it might get him some sympathy, I don't think its going to get him many more votes. This is just the culmination of Trump's career in business which is nothing to be proud of. Too many stories of not paying his bills. Too many failed businesses to list which hurt a lot of people. Too many bankruptcies when that was the only solution. It goes all the way back to when he was in business with his father and they wouldn't rent to blacks. That's who we're supposed to support. No thanks. The Chat is a very small group not representative of a broad based group of voters, but I haven't seen anyone make the smallest step towards now supporting Trump. And I haven't seen any Biden supporters here, just people choosing the lesser of two evils. To make it clear, the above is discussing what you brought up but is not the reason for not being able to vote for Trump (which has been made clear before)

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

I don't think this is going to get more votes for Trump no matter whether the actions against him are appropriate or not. It is only strengthening his supporters and while it might get him some sympathy, I don't think its going to get him many more votes. This is just the culmination of Trump's career in business which is nothing to be proud of. Too many stories of not paying his bills. Too many failed businesses to list which hurt a lot of people. Too many bankruptcies when that was the only solution. It goes all the way back to when he was in business with his father and they wouldn't rent to blacks. That's who we're supposed to support. No thanks. The Chat is a very small group not representative of a broad based group of voters, but I haven't seen anyone make the smallest step towards now supporting Trump. And I haven't seen any Biden supporters here, just people choosing the lesser of two evils. To make it clear, the above is discussing what you brought up but is not the reason for not being able to vote for Trump (which has been made clear before)

The issue is that this case is such a circus overreach, it totally waters down whatever actual legit legal arguments they have against him on other cases. Plus - even independents who are business-minded folks who value fairness are calling total bullshit on this. It just all looks like what it is - an attempt to take down a political opponent and elevate the careers of folks like Bragg, Willis, and James. The polls have already proven that he's gotten a big lift from this stuff. This will be more of the same.

On the other stuff, go after him legally about legit illegal business practices that caused harm. I also see folks all the time conflating foreclosure or "handing the keys back" to a bank as declaring bankruptcy. Legitimate and well-respected business enterprises do it all the time. Most recently on obsolete office product. Very simple - the value of the asset is substantially lower than the note amount, which is recourse only to the project. Why would you continue to pay debt service? Banks are big boys.

 

[Eastmandawg]

The issue is that this case is such a circus overreach, it totally waters down whatever actual legit legal arguments they have against him on other cases. Plus - even independents who are business-minded folks who value fairness are calling total bullshit on this. It just all looks like what it is - an attempt to take down a political opponent and elevate the careers of folks like Bragg, Willis, and James. The polls have already proven that he's gotten a big lift from this stuff. This will be more of the same.

On the other stuff, go after him legally about legit illegal business practices that caused harm. I also see folks all the time conflating foreclosure or "handing the keys back" to a bank as declaring bankruptcy. Legitimate and well-respected business enterprises do it all the time. Most recently on obsolete office product. Very simple - the value of the asset is substantially lower than the note amount, which is recourse only to the project. Why would you continue to pay debt service? Banks are big boys.

It’s all pretty much black & white to me. If you value your wallet and safety, Trump should be your man.

Otherwise, vote for Biden and Kamala.

 

[jbpayne32]

The issue is that this case is such a circus overreach, it totally waters down whatever actual legit legal arguments they have against him on other cases.

He was found guilty of financial fraud. How is that an overreach?

He owes $454M to the state of NY. If he can't pay, then they should seize his assets until the state gets its money. They certainly wouldn't provide you any leniency, if you were in the same situation.

 

[Eastmandawg]

Would think that the appellate court (“guilty”) would have the final say.

454 mil????……check again. I’d say he had a victorious day today. The large amount that they were asking for had more to do with him being stripped of cash so he couldn’t run his campaign again.

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

He was found guilty of financial fraud. How is that an overreach?

He owes $454M to the state of NY. If he can't pay, then they should seize his assets until the state gets its money. They certainly wouldn't provide you any leniency, if you were in the same situation.

That’s the point. No one has ever been in this situation. Completely unprecedented with zero injured party.

 

[Eastmandawg]

That’s the point. No one has ever been in this situation. Completely unprecedented with zero injured party.

27 days to come up with the money certainly was, I’m guessing so was the amount (unprecedented).

Especially with no one injured.

My question is, if you are going to treat Trump this way……why not the lending institution too. They are the ones that go through their own due diligence (appraisals, bank accounts etc). You’d think they would be charged with enabling him.

Two things are obvious to me:

1) He wasn’t a risk, as he paid it back.
2) This is all politically motivated with a democratic judge.

Trump will get some mileage out of all of this. Thinks he will get his appeal and win. Also pick up some voters on the way.

Most are tired of all of this.

 

[celticdawg]

27 days to come up with the money certainly was, I’m guessing so was the amount (unprecedented).

Especially with no one injured.

My question is, if you are going to treat Trump this way……why not the lending institution too. They are the ones that go through their own due diligence (appraisals, bank accounts etc). You’d think they would be charged with enabling him.

Two things are obvious to me:

1) He wasn’t a risk, as he paid it back.
2) This is all politically motivated with a democratic judge.

Trump will get some mileage out of all of this. Thinks he will get his appeal and win. Also pick up some voters on the way.

Most are tired of all of this.

Could you direct me to the law regarding enabling?

Trump is always a risk - look at his past.

 

[Eastmandawg]

Could you direct me to the law regarding enabling?

Trump is always a risk - look at his past.

Would think your google machine works.

Also think that Biden is more of a risk……unless your wallet and safety are not a priority.

 

[MaitlandFloridaDawg]

I don't think this is going to get more votes for Trump no matter whether the actions against him are appropriate or not. It is only strengthening his supporters and while it might get him some sympathy, I don't think its going to get him many more votes. This is just the culmination of Trump's career in business which is nothing to be proud of. Too many stories of not paying his bills. Too many failed businesses to list which hurt a lot of people. Too many bankruptcies when that was the only solution. It goes all the way back to when he was in business with his father and they wouldn't rent to blacks. That's who we're supposed to support. No thanks. The Chat is a very small group not representative of a broad based group of voters, but I haven't seen anyone make the smallest step towards now supporting Trump. And I haven't seen any Biden supporters here, just people choosing the lesser of two evils. To make it clear, the above is discussing what you brought up but is not the reason for not being able to vote for Trump (which has been made clear before)

This election like all elections is the battle of the 30% of the electorate that swings either way. The political persecution won't make a difference to the 70% of the electorate that is already locked in, but they won't decide the election anyway. Political targeting didn't work for Republicans when they went after Clinton in the nineties and it isn't working for Democrats now.

 

[ugaboz]

It’s all pretty black & white to me. If you value your wallet and safety, Trump should be your man.

Otherwise, vote for Biden and Kamala.

if you dont value anything vote biden and harris

 

[willdup]

The issue is that this case is such a circus overreach, it totally waters down whatever actual legit legal arguments they have against him on other cases. Plus - even independents who are business-minded folks who value fairness are calling total bullshit on this. It just all looks like what it is - an attempt to take down a political opponent and elevate the careers of folks like Bragg, Willis, and James. The polls have already proven that he's gotten a big lift from this stuff. This will be more of the same.

On the other stuff, go after him legally about legit illegal business practices that caused harm. I also see folks all the time conflating foreclosure or "handing the keys back" to a bank as declaring bankruptcy. Legitimate and well-respected business enterprises do it all the time. Most recently on obsolete office product. Very simple - the value of the asset is substantially lower than the note amount, which is recourse only to the project. Why would you continue to pay debt service? Banks are big boys.

Sincere question. I haven’t been able to find much in the way of quotes from the more moderate business people who are calling BS on this situation. Can you point me in a direction?

 

[celticdawg]

This election like all elections is the battle of the 30% of the electorate that swings either way. The political persecution won't make a difference to the 70% of the electorate that is already locked in, but they won't decide the election anyway. Political targeting didn't work for Republicans when they went after Clinton in the nineties and it isn't working for Democrats now.

Agree with the first part. Nobody on the Chat is changing their mind. Now, you know anytime a politician is being charged with something, it's going to be political so it's not always political targeting per se. We have some people who want to make a name for themselves and get further in politics - happens all the time and is not always done for the right reasons. But I hope that you don't put the NY fraud case in the same discussion with the Jan 6th and documents trials (like some of here insist on doing).

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

Sincere question. I haven’t been able to find much in the way of quotes from the more moderate business people who are calling BS on this situation. Can you point me in a direction?

CNBC on TV several interviews. Don Peebles, Kevin OLeary, several others I can remember. And those who won’t come right out and say it probably won’t lest they be villified for supporting the anti-Christ. For example I am sure guys like Jamie Dimon think the NYC case and judgement are an embarrassment.

 

[doerunn]

CNBC on TV several interviews. Don Peebles, Kevin OLeary, several others I can remember. And those who won’t come right out and say it probably won’t lest they be villified for supporting the anti-Christ. For example I am sure guys like Jamie Dimon think the NYC case and judgement are an embarrassment.

You also forgot that Trump backer, Mark Cuban lol, said the same thing.

 

[Eastmandawg]

Agree with the first part. Nobody on the Chat is changing their mind. Now, you know anytime a politician is being charged with something, it's going to be political so it's not always political targeting per se. We have some people who want to make a name for themselves and get further in politics - happens all the time and is not always done for the right reasons. But I hope that you don't put the NY fraud case in the same discussion with the Jan 6th and documents trials (like some of here insist on doing).

Hope you don’t believe everything you read, but that may asking too much.

Your life, live it…..

 

[MaitlandFloridaDawg]

Agree with the first part. Nobody on the Chat is changing their mind. Now, you know anytime a politician is being charged with something, it's going to be political so it's not always political targeting per se. We have some people who want to make a name for themselves and get further in politics - happens all the time and is not always done for the right reasons. But I hope that you don't put the NY fraud case in the same discussion with the Jan 6th and documents trials (like some of here insist on doing).

To the general public, it is a coordinated pile on. I would agree with that too.

 

[celticdawg]

Hope you don’t believe everything you read, but that may asking too much.

Your life, live it…..

I don't, especially some of what is posted on the Chat. But I don't get the relevance, because I believe what you were responding to.

 

[celticdawg]

To the general public, it is a coordinated pile on. I would agree with that too.

Sorry you think that way and can't differentiate. BTW, there is no general public anymore. Trump has completely polarized the country starting back when he was President.

 

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

Sorry you think that way and can't differentiate. BTW, there is no general public anymore. Trump has completely polarized the country starting back when he was President.

I think Mr. clings to their guns and their religion and Ms. basket of deplorables did their share of polarizing.

 

[Eastmandawg]

I don't, especially some of what is posted on the Chat. But I don't get the relevance, because I believe what you were responding to.

Not surprised, nothing seems to come easy for you.

 

[DTwnDawg]

Sorry you think that way and can't differentiate. BTW, there is no general public anymore. Trump has completely polarized the country starting back when he was President.

LMAO..

Oidiot is responsible for that…THE GREAT DIVIDER

 

[willdup]

CNBC on TV several interviews. Don Peebles, Kevin OLeary, several others I can remember. And those who won’t come right out and say it probably won’t lest they be villified for supporting the anti-Christ. For example I am sure guys like Jamie Dimon think the NYC case and judgement are an embarrassment.

O’Leary is a noted conservative and ran for Conservative Party leadership in Canada, but I’ll agree on Peebles.

I’m confident guys like Jamie Dimon have never run an operation with two sets of books, but maybe I’m wrong.

The new bond amount seems much more reasonable. Hopefully, given Trump just stated publicaly that he has $500m in cash, he will be able to fund the bond himself and won’t have to solicit foreign help.

 

[-lowcountrydawg]

O’Leary is a noted conservative and ran for Conservative Party leadership in Canada, but I’ll agree on Peebles.

I’m confident guys like Jamie Dimon have never run an operation with two sets of books, but maybe I’m wrong.

The new bond amount seems much more reasonable. Hopefully, given Trump just stated publicaly that he has $500m in cash, he will be able to fund the bond himself and won’t have to solicit foreign help.

Dimon knows as well as anyone how real estate companies and banks work together to underwrite and value property as part of the loan process. This thing will be overturned. Totally unprecedented.

 

[willdup]

Dimon knows as well as anyone how real estate companies and banks work together to underwrite and value property as part of the loan process. This thing will be overturned. Totally unprecedented.

Maybe not totally unprecedented, but I get your point about the amount of the fine.

Edit: my mistake, this is relevant to his other business fraud case. You can see why it all gets a bit confusing.

Before Trump New York Issued 9,800 Charges of Falsifying Business Records | New York Law Journal

Data shows 9,794 cases involving state penal law 175.10, or falsifying business records in the first degree, have been arraigned in both local and superior New York state courts since 2015.

www.law.com

 

[woofn]

He was found guilty of financial fraud. How is that an overreach?

He owes $454M to the state of NY. If he can't pay, then they should seize his assets until the state gets its money. They certainly wouldn't provide you any leniency, if you were in the same situation.

he owes 454 mil to NY…I call bullshit!

 

[ToddBburn]

Maybe not totally unprecedented, but I get your point about the amount of the fine.

Edit: my mistake, this is relevant to his other business fraud case. You can see why it all gets a bit confusing.

Before Trump New York Issued 9,800 Charges of Falsifying Business Records | New York Law Journal

Data shows 9,794 cases involving state penal law 175.10, or falsifying business records in the first degree, have been arraigned in both local and superior New York state courts since 2015.

www.law.com

How many of the 9800 involved a loan that was satisfied? They do not investigate and bring up charges on loans that were satisfied.
So it is unprecedented in that no one takes time to investigate loans where there was no financial loss to anyone. There is no reason that a business would do that.
Political differences are the driver behind the review of the loans.

 

[willdup]

How many of the 9800 involved a loan that was satisfied? They do not investigate and bring up charges on loans that were satisfied.
So it is unprecedented in that no one takes time to investigate loans where there was no financial loss to anyone. There is no reason that a business would do that.
Political differences are the driver behind the review of the loans.

Apologies, I said above I had confused his two business fraud cases. The article is pertinent to the upcoming Stormy Daniels case, not the fraudulent asset value civil case.

It’s a lot to keep track of. I can see whyTrump is siphoning off donor funds to pay for his legal bills given the costs involved.

 

[ugafish]

Sorry you think that way and can't differentiate. BTW, there is no general public anymore. Trump has completely polarized the country starting back when he was President.

How Did you miss the guy before him?