(10-06-2023 03:52 PM)banker Wrote: (10-05-2023 04:51 PM)banker Wrote: Tanq, do you believe this case has political motivations and punitive judgement beyond what we would see for other real estate developers with an identical fact pattern?
It says a lot that he has time to write multi paragraph, multi quote posts, but not the time to reply to a question that only requires a one word answer.
Intellectual honesty is a bridge too far for many people.
Sorry I didnt see it.
It could well be what you say. Or it could be that Trump has a long history of this.
If Trump engaged in fraudulent activity, I have zero problem with this pursuit.
If anyone engages in the level and depth of activity as has been alleged I wouldnt have a problem.
Notwithstanding if Trump has a political history or not ---
No one forced Trump to do the actions in the complaint, if shown he directed them.
No one pointed a gun at Trump's head to make Trump to do the actions in the complaint, if shown he directed them.
And it seems clear from the record that it is a real issue. And trump has every opportunity to present his side in the remaining counts. And he has every right to pursue an appeal of the corporate death penalty represented by the SJ.
If you think others have done this same thing at this apparent level -- then I would have zero issue with a similar AG action.
If in fact there is liability here due to persistent behavior, bummer that Trump did it and was quite prominent. If it is found he persistently breached his obligations -- kind of stupid to operate that way for a score of years and hope to fly under the radar with it with a prominent political career following those actions.
If it is found that he was pure and innocent as the driven snow, Ill take your position. The record doesnt really help him here on that.
Criminy, right now, his attorneys are now arguing that everything was because of his accountants -- Kise mentioned he thinks Mazur should be the one on trial here. That doesnt sound like a defense that is saying 'good appraisals, and good financial condition' -- it sounds as though they are admitting the issues in the SCFs and simply pointing the finger. The testimony of Trump's ex-controller (and fellow defendant in the suit) today certainly didnt help the 'there is nothing wrong in the statements' defense page.
Kind of a far cry from what the gallery here is repeating. I guess that hot take hasnt come through with the new messaging yet.