There is no crime here. No one was wronged. Banks made money off the money they lent. Trump made money off of what he borrowed. Where is the “fraud?”
Like Fani Willis getting busted, now Letitia James is busted too!!!
Posts
Total:
107
In a capitalist society, laws against fraud exist to protect not only the direct victims of fraud but also the overall integrity of the marketplace.
The reason we outlaw fraud, among other misbehavior, is to facilitate trust in business transactions. If I sign a contract to pay money in exchange for some service, I want to be confident that the promised service will be delivered. Or that if it isn’t, there will be legal consequences — regardless of the other party’s fame, wealth or political connections.
-->
@FLRW
You must be a banker that relies on a corrupt DA to free you from due diligence.
-->
@FLRW
If I sign a contract to pay money in exchange for some service, I want to be confident that the promised service will be delivered. Or that if it isn’t, there will be legal consequences — regardless of the other party’s fame, wealth or political connections.
Want to explain where this happened in the case lol
-->
@ILikePie5
Right...where did the bank sign a loan contract for a fake property? Let's see that contract. Oh right, that would make the bank liable for negligence and every stockholder could then sue the bank for fraud.
-->
@ILikePie5
There is no crime here.
Yeah, that's why he has 91 felony indictments.
No one was wronged.
Except for the four times he's declared bankruptcy, and the 50-year history of defaulting on debts, and the hundreds of contractors that went bankrupt because he refused to pay.
Banks made money off the money they lent.
I suppose that's why they are lining up to lend him the money to appeal the fraud judgement.
Trump made money off of what he borrowed. Where is the “fraud?”
LOL, typical MAGA logic, if you make money off a crime, it's not a crime, if people believe a lie, it's not a lie, if you lose an election, you didn't lose an election.
Trump made money defrauding people with Trump University, so that wasn't fraud,
He made money off his charity scam, so that wasn't fraud, it's OK to steal from charitable causes if you make money doing it.
If you're famous, you can sexually assault women too, they just let you. I don't know why the 26 women who have accused him didn't know that.
Trump loves you.
There is no crime here.Yeah, that's why he has 91 felony indictments.
Not a crime.
No one was wronged.Except for the four times he's declared bankruptcy, and the 50-year history of defaulting on debts, and the hundreds of contractors that went bankrupt because he refused to pay.
Not a crime if Trump buys stock and loses money. In fact, not a crime for any investor to take a risk and lose his own money.
Banks made money off the money they lent.I suppose that's why they are lining up to lend him the money to appeal the fraud judgement.
The banks are afraid of the New York DA, not Trump. Banks are a lot easier to sue for fraud. New York is going to find out the hard way why you don't abuse the law to target your political rivals.
Trump made money off of what he borrowed. Where is the “fraud?”LOL, typical MAGA logic, if you make money off a crime, it's not a crime, if people believe a lie, it's not a lie, if you lose an election, you didn't lose an election.Trump made money defrauding people with Trump University, so that wasn't fraud,He made money off his charity scam, so that wasn't fraud, it's OK to steal from charitable causes if you make money doing it.If you're famous, you can sexually assault women too, they just let you. I don't know why the 26 women who have accused him didn't know that.Trump loves you.
In Democrat world, everything is a crime, unless you are a Democrat. This is why Trump's poll numbers are going up, because people do not want to live in that world of tyranny and one party fiat.
-->
@ILikePie5
There is no crime here. No one was wronged. Banks made money off the money they lent. Trump made money off of what he borrowed.
So when a drug dealer gets arrested, he gets to be set free until the prosecutor can prove one of his drugs killed someone, right?
Want to explain where this happened in the case lol
He just explained how laws against fraud are to protect the marketplace, which used to be common sense.
-->
@Greyparrot
You must be a banker that relies on a corrupt DA to free you from due diligence.
Part of due diligence is asking the only person who would know to disclose the details of the property you are considering accepting as collateral and knowing that you can trust their answers because they are required by law to tell you the truth.
-->
@FLRW
In a capitalist society, laws against fraud exist to protect not only the direct victims of fraud but also the overall integrity of the marketplace.
It really is remarkable how things that were once considered such basic common sense and that no serious person would ever think to question suddenly become a sign of your political affiliation all because Trump challenged it. And yet when we talk about the cult that is MAGA all the Trump supporters act like they have no idea what we're talking about.
-->
@Double_R
You just described the opposite of due diligence.
Do you know anything true about due diligence?
If this is what passes for "basic common sense" in the Democrat cult, their fate is assured.
With such distorted definitions, there is no path to any accountability. Trusting someone is NOT due diligence! Nor is it holding anyone accountable... But old Joe tells you to trust him, so that's the beginning and the end of the "common sense" due diligence from a left cultist.
-->
@Double_R
Part of due diligence is asking the only person who would know to disclose the details of the property you are considering accepting as collateral and knowing that you can trust their answers because they are required by law to tell you the truth.
I suppose with this mindset, you would not dare question any car salesman because they are required by law to tell the truth. It all makes sense now why the current leader of the left-tribe is the son of a used-car salesman.... You have to be that gullible to think this "part" passes for "due-diligence"
You have to be that gullible to believe the state has the foresight to justly and fairly fine the car dealership if you never filed a complaint...
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Can you imagine any situation in your life where you felt you could trust someone without question because the law compelled them?
-->
@Double_R
So when a drug dealer gets arrested, he gets to be set free until the prosecutor can prove one of his drugs killed someone, right?
Lmao what? That’s not even close to what happened in the case.
He just explained how laws against fraud are to protect the marketplace, which used to be common sense.
And how do those laws apply here. You clearly do not understand how valuation works.
Part of due diligence is asking the only person who would know to disclose the details of the property you are considering accepting as collateral and knowing that you can trust their answers because they are required by law to tell you the truth.
That’s literally not what due diligence means lol. Lemme explain to you in simple terms. Mike, the owner of the site thinks the site is worth 7 million and wants to put that up as collateral. You as the bank NEVER take his word for gospel. You do your own valuation to see what you think it’s really worth whether it is 3,5,7,or 9 million. That’s what due diligence means.
-->
@Sidewalker
Yeah, that's why he has 91 felony indictments.
I asked you to prove what crime you think he committed here and how he did that. In detail please.
Except for the four times he's declared bankruptcy, and the 50-year history of defaulting on debts, and the hundreds of contractors that went bankrupt because he refused to pay
Lmaoo he has declared corporate bankruptcy on a couple of businesses which is normal. You clearly lack understanding of the business world.
I suppose that's why they are lining up to lend him the money to appeal the fraud judgement
Trump is paying cash.
LOL, typical MAGA logic, if you make money off a crime, it's not a crime, if people believe a lie, it's not a lie, if you lose an election, you didn't lose an election.
Want to explain how it’s a crime? You have yet to do so. People make money off of loans every day. Is that illegal?
Trump made money defrauding people with Trump University, so that wasn't fraud,
Irrelevant. I am asking about loan case
He made money off his charity scam, so that wasn't fraud, it's OK to steal from charitable causes if you make money doing it.
Irrelevant. I am asking about loan case
If you're famous, you can sexually assault women too, they just let you. I don't know why the 26 women who have accused him didn't know that.
We all forget about Tara Reade
Trump loves you.
Biden loves you :)
-->
@Greyparrot
You just described the opposite of due diligence.
It's not the opposite genius, it's part of the process (that's why I used the word "part").
Of course the lender needs to verify the information, because the applicants do get things wrong. But if the applicant was permitted to flat out lie, then there would be no point in the banks communicating with the applicant at all. The very idea of disclosure goes completely out the window, making real estate loans a much more dangerous venture, thereby driving up the prices for everyone.
I suppose with this mindset, you would not dare question any car salesman because they are required by law to tell the truth.
If they sell me a car by purposefully misrepresenting key facts about that car, that's fraud.
Everyone knows this.
Can you imagine any situation in your life where you felt you could trust someone without question
No one said anything about believing without question. You just made that up because you cannot refute the arguments being made without misrepresenting them.
-->
@Sidewalker
How do you know you're about to have a civil war with fascists? They can't remember the difference between accusations and crimes.There is no crime here.Yeah, that's why he has 91 felony indictments.
-->
@Greyparrot
Can you imagine any situation in your life where you felt you could trust someone without question because the law compelled them?
No, but I know of more than a couple examples where government regulations have created a false sense of security and actually increased the prevalence, damage, and inability to cure of fraud.
The best example is probably building codes. They are often overly complicated and litigious and if you read the whole book you'll realize that quite a lot is allowed if it makes sense, but people don't think outside the box so they just do things one standard way.
So they serve to constrain people to making the same mistakes and being sub-optimal in many situations, but they also give license to shoddy work since low-ethics contractors often develop relationships with inspectors (who are not above signing off without thorough inspections regardless).
People have this notion that if they hire a professional the law constrains them to do the work correctly, but in practice (personally witnessed and talked to many contractor types who confirm) there is no repercussions to failing to meet code or meeting code in some way that is absurd, unsafe, or bound to fail.
For instance I once lived in a county where all electrical installations and modifications required inspection. Do you know how many times that I know of that an electrician pulled a permit (which is required to get an inspector to show up) without being specifically requested to do so?
0
Never
They break the law constantly.
Now of course good work still gets done, but that's because some people still have professional pride, honor, and of course rational self-interest (they want referrals and you can still be sued).
I was told by an inspector that a neighbor was complaining about bushes and therefore a completely unrelated thing needed to be changed and I pointed out that no construction crew has ever done that for residential properties. He admitted to me that everyone breaks that law.
These are the kinds of life experiences that profoundly confirm the abstract theories and observations of (genuine) liberals like John Locke, Adam Smith, Voltaire, Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Ayn Rand, and Thomas Sowell.
Tax evaluations of property value and speed limits are a perfect example of laws designed to be broken. They exist only to make examples of enemies of the state at the discretion of the state. Such laws are the vehicle of corruption, which is why I don't really care if Trump broke a law if it is such a law just as I don't care if MLK technically broke some law such law: https://www.blackhistory.com/2019/11/martin-luther-king-jr-was-arrested-29-times-crimes.html
Here is how you can identify these kinds of laws: If a god was tasked with enforcing the law, a god who saw everything and followed the letter of the law precisely, would more than 50% of the population support its repeal?
If the answer is "Yes" then it's a law designed to be broken. It's probably victimless and stupid besides. It almost certainly has no moral foundation.
-->
@Double_R
(that's why I used the word "part").
It's still wrong.
But if the applicant was permitted to flat out lie, then there would be no point in the banks communicating with the applicant at all.
Wrong. Just because people lie on resumes doesn't mean an employer throws out every resume....
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
The abuse of discretionary law is legion and inevitable, therefore; we should limit those kinds of laws as much as possible.
If the law is important enough to be applied universally, then it should stand.
-->
@ILikePie5
You clearly do not understand how valuation works.
He doesn't. If the law was applied universally to every property owner, they all would be slapped with a fine the second they listed any property value over the tax-assessed value. This case is straight up malfeasance.
-->
@ILikePie5
So when a drug dealer gets arrested, he gets to be set free until the prosecutor can prove one of his drugs killed someone, right?Lmao what? That’s not even close to what happened in the case.
You asserted that there is no punishable crime here because no one was harmed. So I simply took your stated position and applied the exact same logic to another example.
If the lack of a victim = no punishable crime, then it follows that someone who deals drugs cannot be prosecuted unless the drugs he sells cause harm to the people who purchased them.
Therefore, the burden is on the prosecution not only to show the drug dealer broke the law by selling drugs, but they just produce actual victims from the drugs he sold, otherwise he goes free with no charges.
He just explained how laws against fraud are to protect the marketplace, which used to be common sense.And how do those laws apply here.
Because he committed fraud within the marketplace.
That’s literally not what due diligence means lol.
See my latest response to GP
-->
@Greyparrot
(that's why I used the word "part").It's still wrong.
No, it's not. So there.
But if the applicant was permitted to flat out lie, then there would be no point in the banks communicating with the applicant at all.Wrong. Just because people lie on resumes doesn't mean an employer throws out every resume....
No, but employers can fire any applicant at any point after job offer if they later learn that the applicant lied. Lenders can't fire the loan applicant, they already gave them their money.
Serious question for you... Do you think loan application fraud should be illegal? Yes or No?
No deflections, no whataboutisms, this is a very simple Yes or No.
-->
@Double_R
You asserted that there is no punishable crime here because no one was harmed. So I simply took your stated position and applied the exact same logic to another example.
It’s a false equivalency since one is a crime and the other isn’t.
If the lack of a victim = no punishable crime, then it follows that someone who deals drugs cannot be prosecuted unless the drugs he sells cause harm to the people who purchased them.
I mean drugs do cause harm either way, but I digress
Therefore, the burden is on the prosecution not only to show the drug dealer broke the law by selling drugs, but they just produce actual victims from the drugs he sold, otherwise he goes free with no charges.
No? If he sold drugs, he broke the law…
-->
@Double_R
It's not the opposite genius, it's part of the process (that's why I used the word "part").Of course the lender needs to verify the information, because the applicants do get things wrong. But if the applicant was permitted to flat out lie, then there would be no point in the banks communicating with the applicant at all. The very idea of disclosure goes completely out the window, making real estate loans a much more dangerous venture, thereby driving up the prices for everyone.
What? This makes zero sense. The first rule of valuation is that there is no true valuation. By your definition, a person would always be lying, which you argue is criminal. That’s not the way real estate works. Banks ask for records. If the client doesn’t provide them, the bank can choose to ignore it (shareholders would revolt) or they refuse service. Let’s say for example Mike says DebateArt is worth 5 million. He has to back up his claim with numbers. Now, the bank can say your methodology and numbers make zero sense and therefore say they think the value is 1 million. That’s not a crime at all.
If they sell me a car by purposefully misrepresenting key facts about that car, that's fraud.Everyone knows this.
That’s a whole different case that involves warranties and implied liabilities, etc.. It’s a false equivalency.
No one said anything about believing without question. You just made that up because you cannot refute the arguments being made without misrepresenting them.
Lol that’s exactly what you’re doing. If Trump provides his numbers, the banks don’t take them as gospel. The banks go and get their own lawyers, appraisers, etc.. That’s literally what due diligence means
-->
@Double_R
Do you think loan application fraud should be illegal? Yes or No?
Yes, if the banks declare fraud, then it should be illegal.
-->
@Double_R
No, but employers can fire any applicant at any point after job offer if they later learn that the applicant lied. Lenders can't fire the loan applicant, they already gave them their money.
They can immediately request their money back. But again, it has to be provable information. Like it’s a fact that my dad is 50 years old. Valuations are not provable.
Serious question for you... Do you think loan application fraud should be illegal? Yes or No?
Yes, if you can prove fraud. Valuations are inherently subjectively, so you cannot prove fraud
No deflections, no whataboutisms, this is a very simple Yes or No.
-->
@ILikePie5
It’s a false equivalency since one is a crime and the other isn’t.
Reality disagrees with you.
Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general may apply, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, for an order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem proper. The word "fraud" or "fraudulent" as used herein shall include any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions. The term "persistent fraud" or "illegality" as used herein shall include continuance or carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct. The term "repeated" as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than one person. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law.
The first rule of valuation is that there is no true valuation. By your definition, a person would always be lying, which you argue is criminal.
Listing your 11k square foot apartment at 30k square feet is not a poor valuation. That's lying, aka fraud.
Let’s say for example Mike says DebateArt is worth 5 million. He has to back up his claim with numbers. Now, the bank can say your methodology and numbers make zero sense and therefore say they think the value is 1 million. That’s not a crime at all.
Correct, and if Mike claims the site gets 30k hits a day when it only gets 11k, he's lying, aka committing fraud.
If they sell me a car by purposefully misrepresenting key facts about that car, that's fraud.Everyone knows this.That’s a whole different case that involves warranties and implied liabilities, etc.. It’s a false equivalency.
No, it absolutely isn't. The fact that the car might come with warranties doesn't change the underlying conduct.
I made a financial decision based in part on false information I was given by the dealership that sold me the car. That's an example of fraud.
This is common sense.
Lol that’s exactly what you’re doing. If Trump provides his numbers, the banks don’t take them as gospel. The banks go and get their own lawyers, appraisers, etc.. That’s literally what due diligence means
Q1: Do you understand what the term "without question" means, and how believing something vs believing something without question are two different things?
Q2: Can you point to a single thing I've said which implies anyone should believe anything without question?
Lenders can't fire the loan applicant, they already gave them their money.They can immediately request their money back
People don't take out loans so they can put it under their mattress. Once the money has been loaned, there's no money there to get back. In fact in many cases the check isn't even given to the applicant, it's directly handed to a third party.
-->
@Greyparrot
Do you think loan application fraud should be illegal? Yes or No?Yes, if the banks declare fraud, then it should be illegal.
The banks don't get to write the laws as we go. If something is illegal, then it's illegal. It doesn't start off as legal and then magically become illegal because a bank declared it so.