1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.AUDIO.OPINION

  • Re: Hochul exposes the rot

    From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Tue Feb 20 12:47:27 2024
    On 2/20/24 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:
    Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry about — that this only applied to Trump.

    Turley replies...that's the real problem.

    Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
    don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.

    Another famous case of "fraudulently billed ... business expenses":

    https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/

    Leona Helmsley.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to All on Tue Feb 20 12:59:31 2024
    On 2/20/24 12:47 PM, mINE109 wrote:
    On 2/20/24 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:
    Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry
    about — that this only applied to Trump.

    Turley replies...that's the real problem.

    Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
    don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.

    Another famous case of "fraudulently billed ... business expenses":

    https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/

    Leona Helmsley.

    Bing can be helpful.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/10/17/trump-keeps-attacking-this-statute-in-ny-fraud-case-heres-why-his-claims-lack-merit/


    SURPRISING FACT

    Trump’s claim that statute 63(12) has “never been used before” is false, with the New York AG using the law to bring lawsuits against such
    parties as a leasing company, e-cigarette company JUUL Labs and a
    predatory lender company. The Trump Organization case isn’t even the
    first time 63(12) has been used against Trump and his businesses, as
    former AG Eric Schneiderman previously sued Trump University under the
    statute, which resulted in a $25 million settlement in 2018.

    End quote.

    If you mean a different Trump prosecution, let me know.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Wed Feb 21 09:30:13 2024
    On 2/20/24 5:40 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 10:59:34 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
    On 2/20/24 12:47 PM, mINE109 wrote:
    On 2/20/24 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:
    Gov. Kathy Hochul claimed that business people had nothing to worry
    about — that this only applied to Trump.

    Turley replies...that's the real problem.

    Turley is a real problem, true. Hochul is correct that businesses that
    don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry about.

    Another famous case of "fraudulently billed ... business expenses":

    https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/726/929/1740340/ >>>
    Leona Helmsley.
    Bing can be helpful.

    and full of crap....but you'll buy into anything that supports your bubble view.

    It's not a bubble when it's verifiable and publicly available. Notice I
    linked a court proceeding and you linked a Jonathan Turley hot take, so
    maybe the pot is calling the kettle black as far as "bubble views" go.

    All you need to ask and answer is this simple question.
    Would this case have ever been filed if Trump had refrained from entering politics?

    Should have been. The Trump University lawsuit preceded his candidacy.

    If you can answer that honestly, you'll know were in the age of gov't political persecution.
    The good old days, when real estate developers could commit fraud
    without legal consequence?

    https://time.com/6215419/trump-legal-trouble-key-strategies/

    Hed: How Trump Survived Decades of Legal Trouble: Deny, Deflect, Delay,
    and Don’t Put Anything in Writing

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to Art Sackman on Wed Feb 21 15:00:24 2024
    On 2/21/24 2:39 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:47:30 PM UTC-5, mINE109 wrote:

    businesses that don't lie on their disclosure forms have nothing to worry
    about.

    no lie he put down what his appraisers estimated the value to be.
    He didn't lie about what their estimates were

    His fraud is a legal fact.

    https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/ef72526861902856/1e996397-full.pdf

    Blame the Accountants
    The crux of the defense at trial was that defendants relied on their accountants, mainly Mazars, but sometimes Whitley Penn, to make sure
    that the SFCs were accurate, and that responsibility for any
    misrepresentations lies with the accountants, not defendants .
    Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump testified several times that they
    would have relied on their accountants to find any errors in the SFCs supporting data.

    As an initial matter, the Court notes that neither Mazars, nor Whitley
    Penn, nor Donald Bender, is a defendant in this action, nor did
    defendants ever attempt to implead them as third party defendants. More significantly, however, this defense is wholly undercut by the
    overwhelming evidence adduced at trial demonstrating that Mazars and
    Whitley Penn relied on the Trump Organization, not vice versa, to be
    truthful and accurate, and they had a right to do so...

    Donald Trump himself acknowledged that, as was certified to in the
    Management Representation Letters, he was responsible for the
    preparation and fair presentation of financial statements.
    There is overwhelming evidence from both interested and non-interested witnesses, corroborated by documentary evidence, that the buck for being truthful in the supporting data valuations stopped with the Trump
    Organization, not the accountants. Moreover, the Trump Organization intentionally engaged their accountants to perform compilations, as
    opposed to reviews or audits, which provided the lowest level of
    scrutiny and rely on the representations and information provided by the client; compilation engagements make clear that the accountants will not inquire, assess fraud risk, or test the accounting records.

    End quote.

    Also, too, there's the falsifying business records part.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Thu Feb 22 09:53:04 2024
    On 2/21/24 8:16 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Wednesday, February 21, 2024 at 1:00:29 PM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:
    On 2/21/24 2:39 PM, Art Sackman wrote:
    On Tuesday, February 20, 2024 at 1:47:30 PM UTC-5, mINE109
    wrote:

    businesses that don't lie on their disclosure forms have
    nothing to worry about.
    no lie he put down what his appraisers estimated the value to
    be. He didn't lie about what their estimates were
    His fraud is a legal fact.

    The banks that loaned him the money disagree.

    The banks that lost money by giving more favorable rates due to his fraud?

    If you mean Deutsche Bank, there's a can of worms.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-secret-ugly-breakup-with-deutsche-bank-revealed-2022-10?op=1

    Deutsche Bank had long known that Trump exaggerated, James has said in
    previous filings.

    In fact, the bank routinely factored in these anticipated exaggerations, applying what the AG called a Trump "haircut" or percentage reduction,
    to whatever the former president swore on paper he was worth...

    [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23132444-deutschebankletter12720]

    A week later, the exchange escalated. Deutsche Bank answered the Trump
    lawyer's email with one from a lawyer of its own.

    It was now lawyer versus lawyer.

    "As you know, Donald J. Trump is required under the terms of his loan guarantees to provide annual financial statements to Deutsche Bank and
    to ensure that those statements 'are true and correct in all material respects,'" the bank's attorney, Gregory Candela, wrote, quoting from
    the guaranty agreement for the $170 million Old Post Office loan.

    Candela repeated Deutsche Bank's request for "further information" on
    the AG's fraud allegations. Then he upped the ante, saying the bank
    needs that information in order to decide "whether an event of default
    may have occurred."

    End quote.

    Deutsche Bank called in the loan and severed ties with Trump, hardly an endorsement of his business practices.

    The NY state law Trump was sued under doesn't require damages. Engeron:

    https://eddsa.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/public/452564_2022_PEOPLE_OF_THE_STATE_OF_v_PEOPLE_OF_THE_STATE_OF_DECISION_AFTER_TRIAL_1688.pdf

    "Timely and total repayment of loans does not extinguish the harm that
    false statements inflict on the marketplace. Indeed, the common excuse
    that “everybody does it” is all the more reason to strive for honesty
    and transparency and to be vigilant in enforcing the rules. Here,
    despite the false financial statements, it is undisputed that defendants
    have made all required payments on time; the next group of lenders to
    receive bogus statements might not be so lucky. New York means business
    in combating business fraud."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)