(10-24-2023 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:14 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:11 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Is this bad?

Yes, an AG put someone who has lied under oath on the stand. Looks bad.....for the AG. Why doesnt she go ahead and pull Avenetti out of prison and have him testify as well.

And does anyone believe Trump is that involved and that Cohen would be involved?

I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

(10-24-2023 06:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:14 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:11 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Is this bad?

Yes, an AG put someone who has lied under oath on the stand. Looks bad.....for the AG. Why doesnt she go ahead and pull Avenetti out of prison and have him testify as well.

And does anyone believe Trump is that involved and that Cohen would be involved?

I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

This is a state enforcement action. Not a traditional tort thing.

The state has to show persistent fraudulent activity. And that the persistent fraudulent activity occurred in the course of business.

(10-24-2023 06:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:14 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:11 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Is this bad?

Yes, an AG put someone who has lied under oath on the stand. Looks bad.....for the AG. Why doesnt she go ahead and pull Avenetti out of prison and have him testify as well.

And does anyone believe Trump is that involved and that Cohen would be involved?

I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

This is a state enforcement action. Not a traditional tort thing.

The state has to show persistent fraudulent activity. And that the persistent fraudulent activity occurred in the course of business.

So I go to my bank and ask my buddy, the president of the bank, for a loan on my house. My house is worth $500,000 but I need a cool mill. So I say my house is worth a million dollars. My buddy at the bank says sure, your house is worth a cool million. Here’s your loan.
Yeah, that happens every day. This is not a fraud case unless the bank officials are complicit. Plain and simple in any sane person’s view.

(10-24-2023 06:57 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:14 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Yes, an AG put someone who has lied under oath on the stand. Looks bad.....for the AG. Why doesnt she go ahead and pull Avenetti out of prison and have him testify as well.

And does anyone believe Trump is that involved and that Cohen would be involved?

I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

This is a state enforcement action. Not a traditional tort thing.

The state has to show persistent fraudulent activity. And that the persistent fraudulent activity occurred in the course of business.

So I go to my bank and ask my buddy, the president of the bank, for a loan on my house. My house is worth $500,000 but I need a cool mill. So I say my house is worth a million dollars. My buddy at the bank says sure, your house is worth a cool million. Here’s your loan.
Yeah, that happens every day. This is not a fraud case unless the bank officials are complicit. Plain and simple in any sane person’s view.

And does anybody believe Cohen is doing all the mathematical manipulations? He can't even keep his stories straight from week to week, let alone do accounting and appraisals. And what he is saying is that he alone produced fraudulent numbers. No accountant would use the term "reverse engineer."

(10-24-2023 06:57 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 12:14 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Yes, an AG put someone who has lied under oath on the stand. Looks bad.....for the AG. Why doesnt she go ahead and pull Avenetti out of prison and have him testify as well.

And does anyone believe Trump is that involved and that Cohen would be involved?

I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

This is a state enforcement action. Not a traditional tort thing.

The state has to show persistent fraudulent activity. And that the persistent fraudulent activity occurred in the course of business.

So I go to my bank and ask my buddy, the president of the bank, for a loan on my house. My house is worth $500,000 but I need a cool mill. So I say my house is worth a million dollars. My buddy at the bank says sure, your house is worth a cool million. Here’s your loan.
Yeah, that happens every day. This is not a fraud case unless the bank officials are complicit. Plain and simple in any sane person’s view.

Try looking up 'standalone fraud' and 'enforcement action'.

(10-24-2023 09:03 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:57 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  And does anyone believe Trump is that involved and that Cohen would be involved?

I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

This is a state enforcement action. Not a traditional tort thing.

The state has to show persistent fraudulent activity. And that the persistent fraudulent activity occurred in the course of business.

So I go to my bank and ask my buddy, the president of the bank, for a loan on my house. My house is worth $500,000 but I need a cool mill. So I say my house is worth a million dollars. My buddy at the bank says sure, your house is worth a cool million. Here’s your loan.
Yeah, that happens every day. This is not a fraud case unless the bank officials are complicit. Plain and simple in any sane person’s view.

And does anybody believe Cohen is doing all the mathematical manipulations? He can't even keep his stories straight from week to week, let alone do accounting and appraisals. And what he is saying is that he alone produced fraudulent numbers. No accountant would use the term "reverse engineer."

He actually testified that he and Weisselberg did this. and did so based on Trump setting a 'goal' of net worth to be reached.

Like I said -- Weisselberg could be recalled to testify to the contrary to impeach Cohen on this.

C'mon Tanq.... Stop.


Trump may be guilty of something and that is fine - I am not arguing his guilt. But you seem to have many, many (too) defenses for others around this who also were complicit in some way to these transactions. If lenders are granting on overblown values (under collateralized loans) at the very least that is a Bondability issue for those employees - they should be losing their jobs as lending jobs too.

(10-25-2023 05:57 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  C'mon Tanq.... Stop.


Trump may be guilty of something and that is fine - I am not arguing his guilt. But you seem to have many, many (too) defenses for others around this who also were complicit in some way to these transactions. If lenders are granting on overblown values (under collateralized loans) at the very least that is a Bondability issue for those employees - they should be losing their jobs as lending jobs too.

It’s not a defense of complicity. If there is persistent standalone fraud on the other end by any particular otganization, I have zero problem with an enforcement action like this one.

As for Trumps guilt, I am still cognizant that aside from the failed SJ motions, Trumps defense has still to be heard.

(10-25-2023 05:57 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  C'mon Tanq.... Stop.


Trump may be guilty of something and that is fine - I am not arguing his guilt. But you seem to have many, many (too) defenses for others around this who also were complicit in some way to these transactions. If lenders are granting on overblown values (under collateralized loans) at the very least that is a Bondability issue for those employees - they should be losing their jobs as lending jobs too.

He is an idiot or a liar

Wanna know the biggest liar about property values...go online an look at tax maps and property values. Most grown ups know that real estate people lie when its easier to tell the truth

This is nothing more than selectetive prosecution.

Its a stupid thread for the reeeeeeee bunch to jerk off to


Got him now!

Gtfoh

(10-24-2023 02:36 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:29 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Is Cohen a CPA also? I find it hard to believe that an attorney would be the one formulating a Financial Statement for loans. Cohen will do anything the prosecutors want to get him out of the grease.

If he is doing what you say, I’m sure Weiselberg will be called to contradict that. Cohen has expressly said that was the message to the both of them.

I didn't have a lot of experience with lawyers when I worked for a couple CPA's many moons ago, but the ones I did all fancied themselves as tax accountants as well.

We used to go over any of their tax preparations with a fine tooth comb!

(10-24-2023 09:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:57 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  And does anyone believe Trump is that involved and that Cohen would be involved?

I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

This is a state enforcement action. Not a traditional tort thing.

The state has to show persistent fraudulent activity. And that the persistent fraudulent activity occurred in the course of business.

So I go to my bank and ask my buddy, the president of the bank, for a loan on my house. My house is worth $500,000 but I need a cool mill. So I say my house is worth a million dollars. My buddy at the bank says sure, your house is worth a cool million. Here’s your loan.
Yeah, that happens every day. This is not a fraud case unless the bank officials are complicit. Plain and simple in any sane person’s view.

Try looking up 'standalone fraud' and 'enforcement action'.

Try looking up ‘police state’ and ‘prosecutorial abuse’.

(10-24-2023 02:29 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Is Cohen a CPA also? I find it hard to believe that an attorney would be the one formulating a Financial Statement for loans. Cohen will do anything the prosecutors want to get him out of the grease.

As an aside…. Weiesselberg (the CFO for the Trump organization, and had that responsibility for 40 years and *was* officially the responsible person for the financial statements) is *also* not a CPA. And in his deposition admitted he knew nothing about “GAAP” ( generally accepted accounting principles ) beyond what the acronym stood for.

Kind of joins Cohen with a base level of common knowledge on the subject for their joint task it appears.

(10-25-2023 07:52 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 09:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:57 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 06:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  I’m having a hard time figuring out what the problem is here. If all this is inflated to the point of fraud, when do they haul in the bank officials since they would have to be culpable in this so called crime?

This is a state enforcement action. Not a traditional tort thing.

The state has to show persistent fraudulent activity. And that the persistent fraudulent activity occurred in the course of business.

So I go to my bank and ask my buddy, the president of the bank, for a loan on my house. My house is worth $500,000 but I need a cool mill. So I say my house is worth a million dollars. My buddy at the bank says sure, your house is worth a cool million. Here’s your loan.
Yeah, that happens every day. This is not a fraud case unless the bank officials are complicit. Plain and simple in any sane person’s view.

Try looking up 'standalone fraud' and 'enforcement action'.

Try looking up ‘police state’ and ‘prosecutorial abuse’.

My comments aren’t raw rhetoric, mind you.

(10-25-2023 07:53 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-24-2023 02:29 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Is Cohen a CPA also? I find it hard to believe that an attorney would be the one formulating a Financial Statement for loans. Cohen will do anything the prosecutors want to get him out of the grease.

As an aside…. Weiesselberg (the CFO for the Trump organization, and had that responsibility for 40 years and *was* officially the responsible person for the financial statements) is *also* not a CPA. And in his deposition admitted he knew nothing about “GAAP” ( generally accepted accounting principles ) beyond what the acronym stood for.

Kind of joins Cohen with a base level of common knowledge on the subject for their joint task it appears.

This totally tracks. Any CPA worth his or her salt would probably not give a scheme like this the time of day.

(10-25-2023 06:45 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 05:57 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  C'mon Tanq.... Stop.


Trump may be guilty of something and that is fine - I am not arguing his guilt. But you seem to have many, many (too) defenses for others around this who also were complicit in some way to these transactions. If lenders are granting on overblown values (under collateralized loans) at the very least that is a Bondability issue for those employees - they should be losing their jobs as lending jobs too.

It’s not a defense of complicity. If there is persistent standalone fraud on the other end by any particular otganization, I have zero problem with an enforcement action like this one.

As for Trumps guilt, I am still cognizant that aside from the failed SJ motions, Trumps defense has still to be heard.

“If” …. “I have zero problem”…….

But there’s not one, is there? Only a persecution of a person the AG had openly said she hated. Someone who is a political enemy of the AG. And began on the testimony of a convicted liar who also hates the target. I don’t think I like your type of law and order.

My bottom line:

I believe that the prosecutor and the judge in this case are biased, unethical, and malicious.

If this were a jury trial, and I were a juror, presented with the evidence that has been discussed publicly, I would vote not guilty.

(10-24-2023 04:02 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  Tanq is Tom with a law degree. Still as dumb, but more eloquent about it and more pretentious.

Just because people have a different view than you doesn't make them dumb. Some people have different backgrounds that contribute to their overall views of the world.

If we can't have open discourse then how do we ever move forward without the attacks on each other? Politics has turned into pro wrestling in that everything has to be good or bad, no gray area. The truth is most of it is gray area.

(10-25-2023 08:08 AM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 06:45 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 05:57 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  C'mon Tanq.... Stop.


Trump may be guilty of something and that is fine - I am not arguing his guilt. But you seem to have many, many (too) defenses for others around this who also were complicit in some way to these transactions. If lenders are granting on overblown values (under collateralized loans) at the very least that is a Bondability issue for those employees - they should be losing their jobs as lending jobs too.

It’s not a defense of complicity. If there is persistent standalone fraud on the other end by any particular otganization, I have zero problem with an enforcement action like this one.

As for Trumps guilt, I am still cognizant that aside from the failed SJ motions, Trumps defense has still to be heard.

“If” …. “I have zero problem”…….

But there’s not one, is there?

The NY AG makes hundreds of enforcement action cases per year under 63(12).

As to whether Trump's counterparties engaged in persistent standalone fraud that is worthy of investigation and/or later enforcement action --- I dont know if that is he case or not.

I guess Trump shouldnt have engaged in persistent standalone fraud given that.

Quote:Only a persecution of a person the AG had openly said she hated.

Actually openly said she would investigate.

Quote:Someone who is a political enemy of the AG.

And who apparently actually engaged in persistent standalone fraud according to the summary judgment.

Quote:And began on the testimony of a convicted liar who also hates the target.

Many investigations begin that way. Bummer.

Quote: I don’t think I like your type of law and order.

Im sure you dont.

(10-25-2023 08:59 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And who apparently actually engaged in persistent standalone fraud according to the summary judgment.

If you believe that the summary judgement reflects an accurate and unbiased conclusion based on facts. I don't believe that.

(10-25-2023 08:29 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My bottom line:

I believe that the prosecutor and the judge in this case are biased, unethical, and malicious.

If this were a jury trial, and I were a juror, presented with the evidence that has been discussed publicly, I would vote not guilty.

And what evidence of the judge being unethical, biased, or malicious can you share with us?