Fantastic Headlines

[Grumpmeister]

Somehow I don't think Misty would put one of these close to her face.. 



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069107/alligator-snapping-turtle-bite-finger-Cumbria-captured-councillor.html

[apc2010]

Somehow I don't think Misty would put one of these close to her face.. 



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13069107/alligator-snapping-turtle-bite-finger-Cumbria-captured-councillor.html

 

[Steve]

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-fined-354-9m-after-civil-fraud-trial-hears-he-inflated-wealth-to-secure-loans-13073137

$354M fine.  See Donald, lying your arse off does sometimes have a price 

[Nick]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-68316465.amp

[Steve]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-68316465.amp

[Grumpmeister]

Another self writing comedy routine for Apey.. 

https://metro.co.uk/2024/02/17/man-tried-smuggle-three-huge-pythons-across-border-trousers-20299282/?ico=just-in_weird_most-shared

[Grumpmeister]

https://news.sky.com/story/donald-trump-fined-354-9m-after-civil-fraud-trial-hears-he-inflated-wealth-to-secure-loans-13073137

$354M fine.  See Donald, lying your arse off does sometimes have a price 

I wouldn't start gloating too much just yet. There is still the appeals process and there are plenty of grounds for a successful appeal such as the the fact that the it's a massive fine especially since the supposed victims, the banks themselves said not only was there was no fraud but they had made a profit on the loans and were happy to continue doing business with Trump. Not to mention their own due diligence would have confirmed the value of any property used as collateral which leads to the court's woefully inaccurate valuation of Mar a Largo only being worth $18m. This is a plot of land large enough to stretch to both beachfront and riverfront, Hell if you want an independent valuation Forbes estimated the property alone to be worth $350m and that the resort was making at least $20-$25m a year, far more than the court's $18m estimate and that's before you factor in the brand value. Then you have a partisan AG who campaigned for the position purely on 'getting Trump' a judge who has previously donated thousands to the Democrat party and his court clerk who seems rather pally with Chuck Schumer.



Something that Alina Habba, Trump's attorney was hit with a gagging order and threatened with jail time for questioning.

[Steve]

No Trump said that the banks didn't mind.  But then he also lied his arse off about those properties and then blamed the banks for his lies

[Nick]

No Trump said that the banks didn't mind.  But then he also lied his arse off about those properties and then blamed the banks for his lies

 

[Grumpmeister]

No Trump said that the banks didn't mind.  But then he also lied his arse off about those properties and then blamed the banks for his lies

I'm guessing you missed the testimony from the Deutsche Bank representative but like I said earlier it wouldn't have mattered what value Trump's accountants placed on the property, due diligence would have meant that the only value that mattered was the one that the bank itself came up with.

[Steve]

Actually what mattered was the values he declared for tax were much lower than those he claimed to get the loans.  Either he was defrauding one of them or both.  And his continual denial and personal attacks meant he'd do it again and again unless given an appropriate deterrent.  Which he got.

Oh and it was multiple banks and financial institutions he defrauded not just Deutsche and they did not testify that they didn't mind

[Grumpmeister]

Interesting, you make it sound like Trump did his own property assessments and accounts and so was able to defraud either the banks who's due diligence would have picked up on the discrepancy as I've already said as well as his own tax liability which would have been picked up by the state. This is from the States own Department of Finance website

Calculating the Taxable Value

A property's annual property tax bill is calculated by multiplying the taxable value with the tax rate.

Step 1: Estimate the property's market value. The Department of Finance determines the market value differently depending on they type of property you own.

Step 2: Multiply the estimated market value by the level of assessment,î which is 6% (Tax Class 1) or 45% (all other classes).

https://www.nyc.gov/site/finance/property/property-calculating-your-annual-tax-blll.page#:~:text=Step%201%3A%20Estimate%20the%20property%27s,%25%20(all%20other%20classes).

So again, self assessment is just that. The Department of Finance makes their own determination using independent assessors and would have picked up on any discrepancies in property values for each area there was a Trump property. If you want an example the court cases uses an $18m valuation for Mar a Largo which is approximately 65000 square feet. A property almost half the size in the same area has gone on the market for $295m

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13057339/americas-expensive-home-beachfront-sale.html

As for calling the fine an appropriate deterrent, the Associated Press, that well known bastion of Trump supporters went back over 70 years of court filings and could not find a single case of a person or entity being fined to anywhere near this degree after being found guilty in a similar case. Plus when you factor in the interest it comes to $500m which has to either be paid in full or a bond posted for 10% of the value which comes with it's own crippling fees and interest payments BEFORE Trumps legal team will be allowed to lodge an appeal which goes against a core tenet of the constitution that being life liberty or property cannot be taken without due process and appeals are a key part of said process.

[Barman]

Surely, even the most ardent Trump hater can see this fine and the conditions attached to it are completely unfair and unreasonable (not to say unprecedented).

It is a blatant attempt to interfere in the election and stop him running (with the added bonus or ruining him)...

[Barman]

I read an interesting post about it elsewhere...

I find it interesting to compare different borrower / lender relationships and contrast the third-party claims made.

Liar Loans A decade and a half ago, the American home lending and mortgage market became very aggressive in seeking out borrowers; lenders had discovered that they could securitize their loans (package them up and sell them to other investors) so they could make many more loans on a small capital base. They eventually reached the state where a borrower could misstate (which in practice, meant dramatically overstate) the value of the property to be charged, as well as his or her income, or even employment status. The first, the valuation, is a matter of opinion and expectation – we probably have to expect that borrowers will be optimistic. The second, though, is a matter of fact cold hard fact – any borrower knows whether they are employed, and knows (or can ascertain) their income – misstatements there are deliberate lies. This was such a staple in the financial world that such mortgages were known as “Liar Loans.”
Well, it all came a-cropper when the the housing market had expanded to the point that there were more homes available than liars who wanted to buy them, and the formerly delightful practice of buying and flipping homes for a profit no longer worked. At that point, some of the liars had to default on their loans, and holders of those “mortgage-backed securities” didn’t get the monthly or quarterly payment they expected. This constrained the mortgage market, since mortgages couldn’t be so conveniently bundled and sold, so lenders were constrained by their capital bases – tighter mortgage restrictions depress and contract the housing market, and we see a vicious cycle forming.

The result was the “Global Financial Crisis” – the worst depression since the 1930’s: thousands, perhaps millions of families lose their homes, businesses fail, and we need a significant government policy response (primarily Quantitative Easing – pouring money into the market to maintain liquidity) to avoid a catastrophe. None of the borrowers on Liar Loans was ever prosecuted for fraud: why would they be – they are somehow the victims in this little escapade? The poor sweet darlings were seduced by evil lenders to take out loans that they didn’t know they would have to repay. If anything, they should be compensated for their loss and hardship. The bankers are widely excoriated as Predatory Lenders who abused the naivete of the hapless borrowers, and are modern pariahs.
In fact, note that the Liar Loans were in effect call options on valuable assets that were anticipated to appreciate – for the liars that got out of the game at the right time (either by luck or skill), it was the greatest financial windfall of their lives

Donald Trump Trump approached banks to request loans, and included statements of the value of properties he would use as security. Any banker knows that valuations are opinion, and that he had better check the values for himself. Having been one , I can tell you that a good banker does not lend on value (at least, not primarily), but on cash flow. I have no idea whether Trump misstated cash flows, but they are much more difficult to fake, particularly given financial statements, and the bank’s ability to observe at least the cash that flows in and out of the accounts held with that bank. Obviously, future cash flows are a matter of expectation, so a prudent lender ensures a margin of safety. We have the testimony of the lender in question – Deutsche Bank – that they did all those things, and were satisfied with the information provided by Trump, and they determined the property values for themselves and found them to be adequate, and the loans to be supportable.

Trump’s statements to the Deutsche Bank did not affect his property taxes, since the property value for that purpose is set by the County Assessor, or similar official. They did not affect his income tax liabilities, since values reported to the IRS or used to calculate gains or losses are based on historic cost plus or minus some pretty specific rules set and enforced by the IRS. Trump’s statements to the Deutsche Bank did not affect the Deutsche Bank – there has been no default; no loss, no Global Financial Crisis, and no families losing their homes. Yet, Trump is a fraudster, the Deutsche Bank is the “victim” of this lossless fraud – or perhaps somehow we all are victims, without having lost a whit. I see no accusations that Deutsche Bank is a Predatory Lender, and no claims that Trump is somehow a naive victim, perhaps deserving of compensation.

The Difference The Liar Loan borrowers were pursuing The American Dream of home ownership – their blatant fraud and deceit could be overlooked. Besides, they were expected to vote in future elections, and there were enough of them that neither party could afford to alienate them. Trump, by contrast, only has one vote – and the whole Trump Organization may muster a couple of dozen. More importantly, he is a threat to the established order (particularly Democrats) so any manner of injuring him or damaging his political hopes is both right and proper – in fact, it’s the duty of any patriot. This is how republics gain the adjective “Banana.”

Hmm, lets see how many other NY businesses get prosecuted under this law in the future, and how many of them are run by Democrat donors, then we’ll have an idea of what exactly just went on here. 

[Steve]

Not just a river in Egypt then