"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single
dollar of that fine.
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single
dollar of that fine.
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single
dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the >>>> end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he >>>> characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single
dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked the >>>>> books by inflating questionable figures without any support inDid they overturn the verdict?
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are >>>>> so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the >>>>> end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President >>>>> Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he >>>>> characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It >>>>> made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single
dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked the >>>>>> books by inflating questionable figures without any support inDid they overturn the verdict?
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are >>>>>> so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the >>>>>> end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President >>>>>> Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he >>>>>> characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It >>>>>> made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth >>>>>> between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single
dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked the >>>>>>> books by inflating questionable figures without any support inDid they overturn the verdict?
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are >>>>>>> so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the >>>>>>> end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's >>>>>>> absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President >>>>>>> Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he >>>>>>> characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It >>>>>>> made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth >>>>>>> between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting. >>>>>>>
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single >>>>>>> dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a
liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict
itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for
that to be overturned in another court at some point.
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked the >>>>>>>> books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are >>>>>>>> so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the >>>>>>>> end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.Did they overturn the verdict?
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's >>>>>>>> absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President >>>>>>>> Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he >>>>>>>> characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It >>>>>>>> made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth >>>>>>>> between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting. >>>>>>>>
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single >>>>>>>> dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get >>>>>> addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a
liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict
itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for
that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was
proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:Which is in......New York.
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked the >>>>>>>>> books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are >>>>>>>>> so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In theDid they overturn the verdict?
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's >>>>>>>>> absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President >>>>>>>>> Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It >>>>>>>>> made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth >>>>>>>>> between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting. >>>>>>>>>
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single >>>>>>>>> dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get >>>>>>> addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus. >>>>>
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a
liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict
itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for
that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was
proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get the
basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:Which is in......New York.
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen hadDid they overturn the verdict?
cooked the
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported
figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their
entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's >>>>>>>>>> absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against >>>>>>>>>> President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who
seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied
reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as >>>>>>>>>> worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting. >>>>>>>>>>
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single >>>>>>>>>> dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get >>>>>>>> addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus. >>>>>>
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a
liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict
itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for >>>> that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was
proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get the
basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if they'd known the true value of his assets.
And before you go on and on about how they weren't injured in the end,
let me ask you:
If I take your car while you're asleep, use it for my purposes, and
return it with a full tank of gas...
...is that alright with you?
And I was using "charged" in the generic sense. I know it was a civil
trial, doofus.
On 8/27/25 10:08 AM, Alan wrote:So it's alright to lie to lenders for you as an ordinary consumer.
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-
uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-
uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leadingDid they overturn the verdict?
citizen had cooked the books by inflating
questionable figures without any support in
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was
widely viewed as motivated by his self-
aggrandizement. The final reported figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in
their entirety. In the end, he was off by over
half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously
threw out Engoron's absurd half-a-billion-dollar
judgment and interest against President Donald
Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron
who seemed, as he characterized Trump witnesses,
as having "simply denied reality." It made his
notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-
Lago as worth between $18 million and $27.6
million seem like good accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to
preserve a single dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New
York. That will get addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the
award, doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't
overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that
even a liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it.
The verdict itself falls within their level of "acceptable"
corruption. Look for that to be overturned in another court
at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged,
which was proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't
get the basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you
write seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if
they'd known the true value of his assets.
Incorrect. The banks involved were not harmed and were satisfied
with their business dealings. Specifically, they made significant
profits from their transactions with Trump, and there were no
defaults, breaches, or complaints from the lenders. The banks
conducted their own due diligence and would have qualified him for
loans regardless of the financial statements provided and the terms
or pricing of the loans would not have differed. The judge
acknowledged all that and his reasoning went more to the harm that
might come to future borrowers.
On 8/27/25 10:08 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:Which is in......New York.
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had >>>>>>>>>>> cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported >>>>>>>>>>> figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their
entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's >>>>>>>>>>> absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against >>>>>>>>>>> President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who >>>>>>>>>>> seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied
reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as >>>>>>>>>>> worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting. >>>>>>>>>>>
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single >>>>>>>>>>> dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will >>>>>>>>> get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus. >>>>>>>
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a
liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict
itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for >>>>> that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was
proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get the
basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if
they'd known the true value of his assets.
Incorrect. The banks involved were not harmed and were satisfied with
their business dealings. Specifically, they made significant profits
from their transactions with Trump, and there were no defaults,
breaches, or complaints from the lenders. The banks conducted their own
due diligence and would have qualified him for loans regardless of the financial statements provided and the terms or pricing of the loans
would not have differed. The judge acknowledged all that and his
reasoning went more to the harm that might come to future borrowers.
And before you go on and on about how they weren't injured in the end,
let me ask you:
If I take your car while you're asleep, use it for my purposes, and
return it with a full tank of gas...
Faulty premise that has no bearing, or similarity, to the Trump case.
...is that alright with you?
And I was using "charged" in the generic sense. I know it was a civil
trial, doofus.
On 2025-08-27 10:42, Grammar Check Robot wrote:
On 8/27/25 10:08 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had >>>>>>>>>>>> cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported >>>>>>>>>>>> figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their
entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out >>>>>>>>>>>> Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against >>>>>>>>>>>> President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who >>>>>>>>>>>> seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied >>>>>>>>>>>> reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago >>>>>>>>>>>> as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good
accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a >>>>>>>>>>>> single
dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That >>>>>>>>>> will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award,
doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a >>>>>> liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict >>>>>> itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for >>>>>> that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was >>>>> proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get the >>>> basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if
they'd known the true value of his assets.
Incorrect. The banks involved were not harmed and were satisfied with
their business dealings. Specifically, they made significant profits
from their transactions with Trump, and there were no defaults,
breaches, or complaints from the lenders. The banks conducted their
own due diligence and would have qualified him for loans regardless of
the financial statements provided and the terms or pricing of the
loans would not have differed. The judge acknowledged all that and his
reasoning went more to the harm that might come to future borrowers.
They were harmed because they offered terms they wouldn't have offered
if they thought the risk was greater.
And before you go on and on about how they weren't injured in the
end, let me ask you:
If I take your car while you're asleep, use it for my purposes, and
return it with a full tank of gas...
Faulty premise that has no bearing, or similarity, to the Trump case.
How so? How were you "harmed"?
...is that alright with you?
And I was using "charged" in the generic sense. I know it was a civil
trial, doofus.
On 8/27/25 11:38 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 10:42, Grammar Check Robot wrote:
On 8/27/25 10:08 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had >>>>>>>>>>>>> cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported >>>>>>>>>>>>> figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their >>>>>>>>>>>>> entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out >>>>>>>>>>>>> Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against >>>>>>>>>>>>> President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who >>>>>>>>>>>>> seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied >>>>>>>>>>>>> reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago >>>>>>>>>>>>> as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good >>>>>>>>>>>>> accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a >>>>>>>>>>>>> single
dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That >>>>>>>>>>> will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, >>>>>>>>>> doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned... >>>>>>>>
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a >>>>>>> liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict >>>>>>> itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look >>>>>>> for
that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was >>>>>> proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get the >>>>> basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if
they'd known the true value of his assets.
Incorrect. The banks involved were not harmed and were satisfied with
their business dealings. Specifically, they made significant profits
from their transactions with Trump, and there were no defaults,
breaches, or complaints from the lenders. The banks conducted their
own due diligence and would have qualified him for loans regardless
of the financial statements provided and the terms or pricing of the
loans would not have differed. The judge acknowledged all that and
his reasoning went more to the harm that might come to future borrowers.
They were harmed because they offered terms they wouldn't have offered
if they thought the risk was greater.
And before you go on and on about how they weren't injured in the
end, let me ask you:
If I take your car while you're asleep, use it for my purposes, and
return it with a full tank of gas...
Faulty premise that has no bearing, or similarity, to the Trump case.
How so? How were you "harmed"?
...is that alright with you?
And I was using "charged" in the generic sense. I know it was a
civil trial, doofus.
The banks did their own due diligence and were fine with what they
found. It changed nothing.
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:Which is in......New York.
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked the >>>>>>>>>> books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are >>>>>>>>>> so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In theDid they overturn the verdict?
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's >>>>>>>>>> absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President >>>>>>>>>> Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It >>>>>>>>>> made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth >>>>>>>>>> between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting. >>>>>>>>>>
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single >>>>>>>>>> dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get >>>>>>>> addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus. >>>>>>
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a
liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict
itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for
that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was
proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get the
basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if they'd >known the true value of his assets.
And before you go on and on about how they weren't injured in the end,
let me ask you:
If I take your car while you're asleep, use it for my purposes, and
return it with a full tank of gas...
...is that alright with you?
And I was using "charged" in the generic sense. I know it was a civil
trial, doofus.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 10:08:33 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:Which is in......New York.
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any support in >>>>>>>>>>> reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely viewed as >>>>>>>>>>> motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out Engoron's >>>>>>>>>>> absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago as worth >>>>>>>>>>> between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good accounting. >>>>>>>>>>>
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a single >>>>>>>>>>> dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That will get >>>>>>>>> addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, doofus. >>>>>>>
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned...
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a
liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict
itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption. Look for >>>>> that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was
proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get the
basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if they'd >>known the true value of his assets.
The banks made money and did not and have not complained.
What's you're next guess?
And before you go on and on about how they weren't injured in the end,
let me ask you:
If I take your car while you're asleep, use it for my purposes, and
return it with a full tank of gas...
...is that alright with you?
Your comparison is bizarre and invalid. To correct it, if you did
that and the state asked me if I wanted to complain and said no, then
it must have been ok with you. Of course you wouldn't have filled it
up and blamed me because the gas is low...
And I was using "charged" in the generic sense. I know it was a civil >>trial, doofus.
On 2025-08-27 12:58, Grammar Check Robot wrote:
On 8/27/25 11:38 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 10:42, Grammar Check Robot wrote:
On 8/27/25 10:08 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2025-08-27 07:20, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 14:48:08 -0400, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2025-08-26 07:29, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 05:28:53 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-25 04:29, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 09:18:36 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2025-08-24 07:23, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 11:34:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2025-08-23 11:18, NoBody wrote:
"In New York, a court revealed that a leading citizen had >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cooked theDid they overturn the verdict?
books by inflating questionable figures without any >>>>>>>>>>>>>> support in
reality. Moreover, his wild overvaluation was widely >>>>>>>>>>>>>> viewed as
motivated by his self-aggrandizement. The final reported >>>>>>>>>>>>>> figures are
so absurdly inflated that they were rejected in their >>>>>>>>>>>>>> entirety. In the
end, he was off by over half a billion dollars.
That man is Judge Arthur Engoron.
After a New York appellate court unanimously threw out >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Engoron's
absurd half-a-billion-dollar judgment and interest against >>>>>>>>>>>>>> President
Donald Trump, the irony was crushing. It was Engoron who >>>>>>>>>>>>>> seemed, as he
characterized Trump witnesses, as having "simply denied >>>>>>>>>>>>>> reality." It
made his notorious reliance on an assessment of Mar-a-Lago >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as worth
between $18 million and $27.6 million seem like good >>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounting.
In the end, he could not get a single judge to preserve a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> single
dollar of that fine.
Didn't expect that they would because it's New York. That >>>>>>>>>>>> will get
addressed in future appeals.
Your running away from the post is noted.
It was a New York appellate court that threw out the award, >>>>>>>>>>> doofus.
Which is in......New York.
<eyeroll>
Which YOU said was the reason the verdict wasn't overturned... >>>>>>>>>
...so why the contradiction?
No contradiction at all. The award was SO outrageous that even a >>>>>>>> liberal New York appeals court couldn't not toss it. The verdict >>>>>>>> itself falls within their level of "acceptable" corruption.
Look for
that to be overturned in another court at some point.
Riiiiiiiiight.
How about, Trump did the things with which he was charged, which was >>>>>>> proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Tell us who the victim was. Oh, and it was a civil trial not a
criminal trial where the standard is much lower. If you can't get >>>>>> the
basics correct, how am I supposed to take anything you write
seriously?
The banks who lent him money at rates that they might not have if
they'd known the true value of his assets.
Incorrect. The banks involved were not harmed and were satisfied
with their business dealings. Specifically, they made significant
profits from their transactions with Trump, and there were no
defaults, breaches, or complaints from the lenders. The banks
conducted their own due diligence and would have qualified him for
loans regardless of the financial statements provided and the terms
or pricing of the loans would not have differed. The judge
acknowledged all that and his reasoning went more to the harm that
might come to future borrowers.
They were harmed because they offered terms they wouldn't have
offered if they thought the risk was greater.
And before you go on and on about how they weren't injured in the
end, let me ask you:
If I take your car while you're asleep, use it for my purposes, and
return it with a full tank of gas...
Faulty premise that has no bearing, or similarity, to the Trump case.
How so? How were you "harmed"?
...is that alright with you?
And I was using "charged" in the generic sense. I know it was a
civil trial, doofus.
The banks did their own due diligence and were fine with what they
found. It changed nothing.
You've avoided the question.
How are you harmed if I take your car (let's say I've cloned access via
the car's app) and drive it and return it undamaged and with the same
amount of gas in the tank.
What's changed?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 13:30:14 |
| Calls: | 10,389 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,888 |
| Posted today: | 1 |