When I was involved in the commercial real estate industry decades ago, we kept the brand value at $10 on the books. That made sure accountants and auditors saw that we knew of that, but also realized that it likely has little value (certainly, there are global brands that may hold this high -- such as Coca Cola, but real estate is a market driven enterprise, not a brand one). Commercial real estate is valued at its ability to produce future incomes. Period. TFG claiming outlandish brand values is reason #247 why we know he is a fraudster.
TRump's case was lost a few months ago when Judge Arthur Engoron ruled he was guilty of financial fraud, and what's going in Manhattan the past two weeks is to determine the size of the monetary penalties he and his spawn will pay - pending the ritual appeal process, of course. So, knowing he's already been adjudged as a lying fraudster, tRump is simply using the trial as PR, campaigning, and fund-raising, as is his wont when in the limelight. Media playing along, as is their wont, giving him free air-time, and also an opportunity for tRump to test-drive his range of insults and vulgarities directed toward the judge, AG James, Court Clerk Greenfield, et al, in order to challenge Engoron's gag order. It's all a yuuge game to tRump, and we all are unwilling participants in his little, shabby world.
His case was lost, yes, on the question of liability, but the question of remedies and damages still remains, which is a very big question. On this he is not faring well.
Agree, Jay, as noted, and as you say, tRump and his spawn are banjaxing the *damages* trial with their poorly framed answers to prosecutors' and the judge's questioning. tRump in particular seems to believe that a meltdown in the witness box is a "winner" for him...well, perhaps for his MAGA fund-raising, but hardly as it pertains to minimizing the assessment of damages.
Assuming Trump loses every appeal, how does the state go about collecting damages in a case like this? Is there any way that filing bankruptcy No. 7 would work to his advantage?
Only Chapter 13 applies & that would just provide a schedule for paying off said fine, as court-ordered punishment fines are not dischargeable in a bankruptcy.
His businesses are already under the control of a receiver. That person will, when damages and fines are determined and assessed, proceed to attach, sell, or otherwise monetize those assets up to the amounts determined. Bankruptcy is not available to his business entities until judgements have been satisfied. PERSONAL bankruptcy is another matter.
Agree Dave, but Trump is a master of using other people’s money and history of taking advantage of bankruptcy law to skate free. Let’s take the personal bankruptcy possibility a little further. It’s realistic as I believe he personally guaranteed some of the loans. If the remnants of the business don’t cover the losses, fines, judgments and creditors coming out of Chapter 13, couldn’t he personally also be on the hook? I’d love to know how some of the donor funds are structured. He’s used them to cover personal legal fees and not for their stated purpose (campaigning, etc.). Could the funds be attached?
I would give my right arm to NOT see the media outside the courtroom when he comes out. I don't know why it's a feeding frenzy. They know he's lying. Why bother giving him free air time? There are certainly other stories worth pursuing.
Along similar lines, why didn’t anyone take notice of Trump systematically draining his father’s estate of all assets over time to avoid paying gift and inheritance taxes? Note the various shell companies, etc that the NYT followed up on via the data leaked to them from the IRS. The IRS and NY tax authorities had all the data they needed to proceed.
The most likely answer unfortunately is along the lines of Harvey Weinstein - ie being rich and connected and donating profusely among the NYC political class shielded T. from investigations that the lower-level bureaucrats may have wanted to instigate but were told to kill instead.
I tend to agree with this assessment. This became a possible criminal / civil action when Michael Cohen flipped. Otherwise you get a wall of deniability and stonewalling.
I’ve read a lot about this case, and there’s simply a lot more to this than just the campaign donation (which was returned). The owners had already reached a civil settlement, making it tricky to prosecute. It’s very much more complex, in my view.
The late, great Village Voice reporter, Wayne Barrett, had all the receipts, and wrote extensively on tRump's conniving, including two books exposing his *cough-cough* real-estate "mogul" image...however, tRump just blows through takedowns by sheer bluster and will, and here the bastard is today, playing the same game.
My understanding is the AG must have someone accuse him of wrongdoing. The AG can't just say "gee, I think he's doing something illegal." In this case it was (I think) an article by Forbs.
I'm not a lawyer, but sometimes a lawyer appears in my fiction stories, so I have some important advice for the Bloviator in Chief: Be sure to testify in your criminal trials, as well. Thanks.
Trump's lawyers refused to let him anywhere near Mueller even though he actually wanted to talk. They knew that Trump would have come out of that at least having perjured himself, if not worse.
Even if they're dumb enough to allow him to testify in the criminal trials, there's a key difference. (It's one he probably isn't smart enough to use but...) If you invoke the 5th Amendment in a civil trial, the judge or jury can legally draw a negative inference. Meaning, you invoked the 5th Amendment because you did what the prosecutor alleges you did. In a criminal trial, a judge or jury can't (legally) do that.
If it were any other defendant, the Judge would have cited him for contempt. He allowed Trump to rant and rave and did essentially nothing about it in order to not give Trump what he wanted out of the trial - to be made a martyr.
I suspect they were giving him the rope to hang himself. The more he meanders, the more he blabs. Plus, they don't want to give him material for the appeals court--which you know he will go for.
I'm of the opinion that he will never be broke. Because he'll always have a spotlight on him while claiming his victimhood, and there'll always be a rube or two or a thousand+ who'll send him their hard-earned money because he made them feel sorry for him, the poor persecuted victim of the Dems. He'll squeeze that lemon until he draws his final breath. The only way to stop him from continuing this ruse is to incarcerate him. And we know that'll never happen, either. We must be content with a guilty verdict, massive fines, possible bankruptcy, but... never broke.
Even PT Barnum went bankrupt, despite suckers born every minute. Besides in 45's mind, "broke" is relative. He's already broke, being booted off the Forbes list. If Aristophanes was alive, I can only imagine the satirical play he would write. Jay would have a new hit on his hands.
I'm interested in hearing what Ivanka has to say about Daddy Dearest. She doesn't need him, the other two parasites do. Barron is/has been protected by Melania's fierce renegotiations of the prenup. But the other two? They are hangers on and still need their Daddy. That's a few mouths to feed if Trumpworld goes kerblooey.
Personally...I hope for a non-fatal but debilitating stroke. One that leaves him helpless and voiceless, being taken care of by strangers--or, perhaps even worse, by his resentful sons.
A lot of folks including Jay have written about this. If I understand it correctly, they need to protect the case knowing he will certainly appeal and they want no blow back that they were not impartial.
Trump inflated the value to a ridiculous amount. Wondering if he would balk at paying the property taxes on those higher values. His real estate is only valuable when getting loans. When he pays his taxes he suddenly lives in a dilapidated fixer upper.
The absolute worst. I tried many civil cases during my career (albeit in Boston not NY), watched so many more, taught at two law schools; her whining that Judge E yelled and slammed the table was ridiculous, since she, her co-counsel and tfg caused it.
“‘Intend’ doesn’t mean we will do it." Oh dear.... for crying out loud, somebody get him a dictionary. Someone might interfere with your intentions, sweetie, but when you "intend" to do something - from YOUR standpoint that's exactly what it means. From YOUR standpoint, you WILL do it.
At some point it's more like they were willfully blind rather than duped. They didn't have direct evidence TFG defrauded them until Cohen testified, but some of the things he claimed defy basic logic. In one way, I equate this to the subprime mortgage mess. IMO, in both cases the banks didn't *want* to know the truth. As long as they made money, the truth was irrelevant.
Deusche Bank was/is thoroughly corrupt and had/has direct ties to Alpha Bank and Herman Gef of SBer Bank/SVP. Trump had been Deutshe Bank’s largest creditor at one point. Closer to home, bank holders included Hilton, the Blackstone Group/ Steve Schwartzman, Blackrock, Cerberus (Steven Feinberg), Jerry Rotonda--these aren’t just banks; they are “alternative asset managers.” HA! Guess who jumped into the thick of it to become Deutsche Bank’s rescuer and largest shareholder? The Qatar Royal Family.
. . . Paging Jared Kushner, paging Jared Kushner . . .
Again he is shown preferential treatment, any other defendant doing this on the stand would have been held in contempt of court and tossed in jail. We've all seen it happen for much less than this.
I would like to retired the idea that we should compare Trump to “any other defendant.” It’s clearly not the case that he stands in the same shoes as any other. No other defendant has the backing of the vast majority of one of our two major political parties, can summon violence through stochastic terrorism online, and has the ability to raise hundreds of millions of dollars.
As much as I'd love to see Trump rotting in jail right now, I'm really impressed by how patient, measured, and strategic all the judges involved - except Cannon - have acted. I agree completely with Jay that the power and influence that Trump has over many very angry and potentially violent followers requires that the judges successfully navigate a very long highwire between the beginning of all this and the conclusion of the various trials (including sentencing).
In a court of law, there aren't supposed to be any favorites, or any "too big to fail" entities whatsoever. If contempt of court and a stint in jail is appropriate for defendants - of whatever ilk - who misbehave in court, then it's equally appropriate for this defendant. Otherwise, we are no longer a nation of laws; we have become not only a nation of men, but a nation of men to whom one is obligated to bend the knee and grovel before.
I don't care who backs him. I don't care how much money he can raise, or how much he can run his mouth. If an action taken in court would land you or me or anyone else in contempt, it should be the same for this defendant.
The same goes for his attorneys. I'm a retired litigator. If I'd ever said half the crap these attorneys are saying in court, I'd have already been in contempt. Honestly, telling the judge what he is there to do, then whining when he tells you to sit down? Be glad that's all he told you to do. And if any of my clients had ever carried on in the manner that he has, I'd expect them to be sanctioned in whatever way the Court sees fit.
Every time this petty little toddler tyrant is shown special privileges, it undermines everyone else's faith in the Rule of Law. It makes very clear, one set of laws for me, and another for thee. This is not how any part of our justice system is supposed to be run.
All the more reason to haul his ass into custody. His “stocastic terrorism,” his contempt and threats are demoralizing and aim to undermine the judicial system. Essentially, he is seditious just by bullying the US government and flaunting his criminality without repercussions. So much for “all men are created equal.”
I disagree. Engoron did a masterful job of not blowing his top and giving the defendant fodder for appeal. Also, apparently at lunchtime Wallace asked Engoron to let the defendant prattle on because he was getting what he needed.
I hope there's a banking/financial expert here who can answer this question
Where do the banks Trump did business with stand on this litigation? As Jay wrote, the state contends they lost out on $168 million in interest. Why didn't/don't they go after him for this money? Would any of the banks have a viable lawsuit if they chose to go after him for that money now? I can't imagine that some of the major stockholders of these banks are very happy about the lost revenue.
The banks gave him the rate. It wasn't until it became clear the rate was built on fraudulent data (Cohen's testimony) that the differential of actual interest paid vs. what should have been paid was clear. The point isn't that the *banks* lost the difference, but they very possibly harmed other customers -- see Jay's commentary in this piece.
Deutsche Bank is a $1.5 trillion bank. That’s a lot of zeros. My guess is that they made their money from TFG and are moving on. It’s hard to conceive of that much money. It would take 2700 years to spend a million dollars every day.
There are banks and then there are Russian lending “institutions.” I believe this trial is confined to legitimate NYS entities. . . You may recall, Deutsche Bank went through some “restructuring” several years ago when names like German Khan and his son-in-law Alex Van Der Zwaan (WHO WAS PARDONED BY TRUMP) were in the headlines with Manafort.
Thank you for the summary. Loved the use of "bloviating" in the closing (such an appropriate word for Cheetolini's verbosity . . .).
I saw something yesterday saying that the Mar-a-lardo tax assessment was raised to something like $37 million which likely triggered more ketchup stains when Lardo-in-chief realizes his bloviating likely triggered the re-evaluation and increased taxes . . . Made me smile. . .
There was also an interesting point raised by Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC last night - when asked who in the Trump organization was responsible for preventing and detecting fraud, he said "EVERYONE". O'Donnell called it the stupidest thing a person could say under oath. Smile again . . .
Unfortunately, I'm quite sure TFG will immediately blame DeSantis and use this as a fundraising (grifting) opportunity. His voters (marks) will probably end up paying the taxes for him.
He will increase the membership fees for the club to cover the tax increase. Unfortunately, that will be a rather sizable increase that many members may not wish to cough up if the owner/operator of the club is a convicted felon who is no longer POTUS. ('scuse me - I have to go have a giggle fit now...)
I wonder how many of those members are foreign agents? Not much for them there anymore now that the FBI has rounded up most of the classified documents stored willy nilly throughout the place.
When I was involved in the commercial real estate industry decades ago, we kept the brand value at $10 on the books. That made sure accountants and auditors saw that we knew of that, but also realized that it likely has little value (certainly, there are global brands that may hold this high -- such as Coca Cola, but real estate is a market driven enterprise, not a brand one). Commercial real estate is valued at its ability to produce future incomes. Period. TFG claiming outlandish brand values is reason #247 why we know he is a fraudster.
Wow, good information and further evidence of tRump’s stupidity.
My eldest son calls him a career criminal….apt description.
Or criminal intent
Yeah, brand value in healthcare accounting is a footnote on the financials, not a number per se.
TRump's case was lost a few months ago when Judge Arthur Engoron ruled he was guilty of financial fraud, and what's going in Manhattan the past two weeks is to determine the size of the monetary penalties he and his spawn will pay - pending the ritual appeal process, of course. So, knowing he's already been adjudged as a lying fraudster, tRump is simply using the trial as PR, campaigning, and fund-raising, as is his wont when in the limelight. Media playing along, as is their wont, giving him free air-time, and also an opportunity for tRump to test-drive his range of insults and vulgarities directed toward the judge, AG James, Court Clerk Greenfield, et al, in order to challenge Engoron's gag order. It's all a yuuge game to tRump, and we all are unwilling participants in his little, shabby world.
His case was lost, yes, on the question of liability, but the question of remedies and damages still remains, which is a very big question. On this he is not faring well.
Agree, Jay, as noted, and as you say, tRump and his spawn are banjaxing the *damages* trial with their poorly framed answers to prosecutors' and the judge's questioning. tRump in particular seems to believe that a meltdown in the witness box is a "winner" for him...well, perhaps for his MAGA fund-raising, but hardly as it pertains to minimizing the assessment of damages.
Assuming Trump loses every appeal, how does the state go about collecting damages in a case like this? Is there any way that filing bankruptcy No. 7 would work to his advantage?
Only Chapter 13 applies & that would just provide a schedule for paying off said fine, as court-ordered punishment fines are not dischargeable in a bankruptcy.
His businesses are already under the control of a receiver. That person will, when damages and fines are determined and assessed, proceed to attach, sell, or otherwise monetize those assets up to the amounts determined. Bankruptcy is not available to his business entities until judgements have been satisfied. PERSONAL bankruptcy is another matter.
Agree Dave, but Trump is a master of using other people’s money and history of taking advantage of bankruptcy law to skate free. Let’s take the personal bankruptcy possibility a little further. It’s realistic as I believe he personally guaranteed some of the loans. If the remnants of the business don’t cover the losses, fines, judgments and creditors coming out of Chapter 13, couldn’t he personally also be on the hook? I’d love to know how some of the donor funds are structured. He’s used them to cover personal legal fees and not for their stated purpose (campaigning, etc.). Could the funds be attached?
I would give my right arm to NOT see the media outside the courtroom when he comes out. I don't know why it's a feeding frenzy. They know he's lying. Why bother giving him free air time? There are certainly other stories worth pursuing.
Clicks and advertising revenue. They know Trump brings in both, so the media doesn't give a single damn for truth or responsibility.
Very good question: why did NY allow him to do this for years and years? Why didn't NY hold him accountable ages ago?
Along similar lines, why didn’t anyone take notice of Trump systematically draining his father’s estate of all assets over time to avoid paying gift and inheritance taxes? Note the various shell companies, etc that the NYT followed up on via the data leaked to them from the IRS. The IRS and NY tax authorities had all the data they needed to proceed.
The most likely answer unfortunately is along the lines of Harvey Weinstein - ie being rich and connected and donating profusely among the NYC political class shielded T. from investigations that the lower-level bureaucrats may have wanted to instigate but were told to kill instead.
The Times article using documents provided by Mary Trump also described his tax schemes.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-schemes-fred-trump.html
It wasn't revealed until Michael Cohen discussed it when testifying to Congress. AOC picked up on it that day.
I tend to agree with this assessment. This became a possible criminal / civil action when Michael Cohen flipped. Otherwise you get a wall of deniability and stonewalling.
Prosecutors are not powerless.
New York just dropped the ball, let this guy and his organization do whatever. For years.
My guess: He paid people off to look the other way.
I believe you can put former Manhattan DA Morgenthau in the "look the other way" camp.
Cyrus Vance let Ivanka & Don off on a separate issue (claiming more apartments had been pre-sold than was true)
He dropped the case around the time he got a campaign donation from the family. (details to be verified)
I’ve read a lot about this case, and there’s simply a lot more to this than just the campaign donation (which was returned). The owners had already reached a civil settlement, making it tricky to prosecute. It’s very much more complex, in my view.
There you go, "How they got away with it", Part XXVI.
No one dared to question the Mob Boss connected to the Russian Mob that dominates NYC real estate.
The late, great Village Voice reporter, Wayne Barrett, had all the receipts, and wrote extensively on tRump's conniving, including two books exposing his *cough-cough* real-estate "mogul" image...however, tRump just blows through takedowns by sheer bluster and will, and here the bastard is today, playing the same game.
My understanding is the AG must have someone accuse him of wrongdoing. The AG can't just say "gee, I think he's doing something illegal." In this case it was (I think) an article by Forbs.
I'm not a lawyer, but sometimes a lawyer appears in my fiction stories, so I have some important advice for the Bloviator in Chief: Be sure to testify in your criminal trials, as well. Thanks.
Trump's lawyers refused to let him anywhere near Mueller even though he actually wanted to talk. They knew that Trump would have come out of that at least having perjured himself, if not worse.
Even if they're dumb enough to allow him to testify in the criminal trials, there's a key difference. (It's one he probably isn't smart enough to use but...) If you invoke the 5th Amendment in a civil trial, the judge or jury can legally draw a negative inference. Meaning, you invoked the 5th Amendment because you did what the prosecutor alleges you did. In a criminal trial, a judge or jury can't (legally) do that.
Your comment reminded me of the Holiday Inn Express commercials: “I’m not a lawyer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!”lol
If it were any other defendant, the Judge would have cited him for contempt. He allowed Trump to rant and rave and did essentially nothing about it in order to not give Trump what he wanted out of the trial - to be made a martyr.
I suspect they were giving him the rope to hang himself. The more he meanders, the more he blabs. Plus, they don't want to give him material for the appeals court--which you know he will go for.
Agree. The more he talks the more he loses. At the end of the day it’s just about numbers. He’s toast.
Fingers crossed. I want to see him broke and in jail.
Broke is fine with me. At this point, I don't want any more tax-payer dollars going to support that man. Cardboard boxes are much cheaper.
I'm of the opinion that he will never be broke. Because he'll always have a spotlight on him while claiming his victimhood, and there'll always be a rube or two or a thousand+ who'll send him their hard-earned money because he made them feel sorry for him, the poor persecuted victim of the Dems. He'll squeeze that lemon until he draws his final breath. The only way to stop him from continuing this ruse is to incarcerate him. And we know that'll never happen, either. We must be content with a guilty verdict, massive fines, possible bankruptcy, but... never broke.
Even PT Barnum went bankrupt, despite suckers born every minute. Besides in 45's mind, "broke" is relative. He's already broke, being booted off the Forbes list. If Aristophanes was alive, I can only imagine the satirical play he would write. Jay would have a new hit on his hands.
I'm interested in hearing what Ivanka has to say about Daddy Dearest. She doesn't need him, the other two parasites do. Barron is/has been protected by Melania's fierce renegotiations of the prenup. But the other two? They are hangers on and still need their Daddy. That's a few mouths to feed if Trumpworld goes kerblooey.
Agreed!
I want much worse for him, but I'm not allowed to say. Something about Rome and the old Coliseum comes to mind. And lions. Lots of lions.
PPV would solve the national debt.
"...hang himself...". One lives in hope.
Personally...I hope for a non-fatal but debilitating stroke. One that leaves him helpless and voiceless, being taken care of by strangers--or, perhaps even worse, by his resentful sons.
A lot of folks including Jay have written about this. If I understand it correctly, they need to protect the case knowing he will certainly appeal and they want no blow back that they were not impartial.
Trump inflated the value to a ridiculous amount. Wondering if he would balk at paying the property taxes on those higher values. His real estate is only valuable when getting loans. When he pays his taxes he suddenly lives in a dilapidated fixer upper.
Well, at least he has a good parking garage lawyer in case he decides to buy one. Oh, wait. No, she's terrible!
The absolute worst. I tried many civil cases during my career (albeit in Boston not NY), watched so many more, taught at two law schools; her whining that Judge E yelled and slammed the table was ridiculous, since she, her co-counsel and tfg caused it.
I just look at her and see Melanie Light. Who needs substance if your client likes your looks?
Exactly
“‘Intend’ doesn’t mean we will do it." Oh dear.... for crying out loud, somebody get him a dictionary. Someone might interfere with your intentions, sweetie, but when you "intend" to do something - from YOUR standpoint that's exactly what it means. From YOUR standpoint, you WILL do it.
TRUMP: "Statute of Limitations!!"
Also TRUMP: I want my case delayed until After the Election!!
I have to laugh when I think of tRump’s Russian mob friends at Deutsche Bank probably got duped...
At some point it's more like they were willfully blind rather than duped. They didn't have direct evidence TFG defrauded them until Cohen testified, but some of the things he claimed defy basic logic. In one way, I equate this to the subprime mortgage mess. IMO, in both cases the banks didn't *want* to know the truth. As long as they made money, the truth was irrelevant.
Deusche Bank was/is thoroughly corrupt and had/has direct ties to Alpha Bank and Herman Gef of SBer Bank/SVP. Trump had been Deutshe Bank’s largest creditor at one point. Closer to home, bank holders included Hilton, the Blackstone Group/ Steve Schwartzman, Blackrock, Cerberus (Steven Feinberg), Jerry Rotonda--these aren’t just banks; they are “alternative asset managers.” HA! Guess who jumped into the thick of it to become Deutsche Bank’s rescuer and largest shareholder? The Qatar Royal Family.
. . . Paging Jared Kushner, paging Jared Kushner . . .
Love "Bloviating"--great word that describes the former guy's big mouth, blow hard way of talking
Again he is shown preferential treatment, any other defendant doing this on the stand would have been held in contempt of court and tossed in jail. We've all seen it happen for much less than this.
I would like to retired the idea that we should compare Trump to “any other defendant.” It’s clearly not the case that he stands in the same shoes as any other. No other defendant has the backing of the vast majority of one of our two major political parties, can summon violence through stochastic terrorism online, and has the ability to raise hundreds of millions of dollars.
As much as I'd love to see Trump rotting in jail right now, I'm really impressed by how patient, measured, and strategic all the judges involved - except Cannon - have acted. I agree completely with Jay that the power and influence that Trump has over many very angry and potentially violent followers requires that the judges successfully navigate a very long highwire between the beginning of all this and the conclusion of the various trials (including sentencing).
I respectfully disagree.
In a court of law, there aren't supposed to be any favorites, or any "too big to fail" entities whatsoever. If contempt of court and a stint in jail is appropriate for defendants - of whatever ilk - who misbehave in court, then it's equally appropriate for this defendant. Otherwise, we are no longer a nation of laws; we have become not only a nation of men, but a nation of men to whom one is obligated to bend the knee and grovel before.
I don't care who backs him. I don't care how much money he can raise, or how much he can run his mouth. If an action taken in court would land you or me or anyone else in contempt, it should be the same for this defendant.
The same goes for his attorneys. I'm a retired litigator. If I'd ever said half the crap these attorneys are saying in court, I'd have already been in contempt. Honestly, telling the judge what he is there to do, then whining when he tells you to sit down? Be glad that's all he told you to do. And if any of my clients had ever carried on in the manner that he has, I'd expect them to be sanctioned in whatever way the Court sees fit.
Every time this petty little toddler tyrant is shown special privileges, it undermines everyone else's faith in the Rule of Law. It makes very clear, one set of laws for me, and another for thee. This is not how any part of our justice system is supposed to be run.
All the more reason to haul his ass into custody. His “stocastic terrorism,” his contempt and threats are demoralizing and aim to undermine the judicial system. Essentially, he is seditious just by bullying the US government and flaunting his criminality without repercussions. So much for “all men are created equal.”
I disagree. Engoron did a masterful job of not blowing his top and giving the defendant fodder for appeal. Also, apparently at lunchtime Wallace asked Engoron to let the defendant prattle on because he was getting what he needed.
I agree, Engoron did a good job. But that doesn't change the fact that if you or I did that in a court of law we would be spending time in jail.
Yeah, I know, but if it were me, the fall out wouldn't be particularly high, so I would get my hand slapped.
I hope there's a banking/financial expert here who can answer this question
Where do the banks Trump did business with stand on this litigation? As Jay wrote, the state contends they lost out on $168 million in interest. Why didn't/don't they go after him for this money? Would any of the banks have a viable lawsuit if they chose to go after him for that money now? I can't imagine that some of the major stockholders of these banks are very happy about the lost revenue.
The banks gave him the rate. It wasn't until it became clear the rate was built on fraudulent data (Cohen's testimony) that the differential of actual interest paid vs. what should have been paid was clear. The point isn't that the *banks* lost the difference, but they very possibly harmed other customers -- see Jay's commentary in this piece.
Deutsche Bank is a $1.5 trillion bank. That’s a lot of zeros. My guess is that they made their money from TFG and are moving on. It’s hard to conceive of that much money. It would take 2700 years to spend a million dollars every day.
Per what I just saw on line, that’s how long for “only” 1 trillion dollars.
I think $168 million is peanuts to banks who are in the business of taking in duffel bags of cash through the back door.
Not peanuts to me!
Helluva question. Were they afraid?
There are banks and then there are Russian lending “institutions.” I believe this trial is confined to legitimate NYS entities. . . You may recall, Deutsche Bank went through some “restructuring” several years ago when names like German Khan and his son-in-law Alex Van Der Zwaan (WHO WAS PARDONED BY TRUMP) were in the headlines with Manafort.
"Mistrial!" "Bias!" "Politically motivated!" All sounds great to his dumbass base but aren't going to hold up in court.
Uh, the big part of this trial is over with Engoron's ruling of fraud.
He might be irritating the judge, possibly even on purpose, but he’s really just talking himself into more bother.
Trump opening his mouth and causing trouble? Who’d have thought it? /s 🙄
Thank you for the summary. Loved the use of "bloviating" in the closing (such an appropriate word for Cheetolini's verbosity . . .).
I saw something yesterday saying that the Mar-a-lardo tax assessment was raised to something like $37 million which likely triggered more ketchup stains when Lardo-in-chief realizes his bloviating likely triggered the re-evaluation and increased taxes . . . Made me smile. . .
There was also an interesting point raised by Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC last night - when asked who in the Trump organization was responsible for preventing and detecting fraud, he said "EVERYONE". O'Donnell called it the stupidest thing a person could say under oath. Smile again . . .
Unfortunately, I'm quite sure TFG will immediately blame DeSantis and use this as a fundraising (grifting) opportunity. His voters (marks) will probably end up paying the taxes for him.
He will increase the membership fees for the club to cover the tax increase. Unfortunately, that will be a rather sizable increase that many members may not wish to cough up if the owner/operator of the club is a convicted felon who is no longer POTUS. ('scuse me - I have to go have a giggle fit now...)
I wonder how many of those members are foreign agents? Not much for them there anymore now that the FBI has rounded up most of the classified documents stored willy nilly throughout the place.
Pretty sure that number is non-zero...
Yup. The willfully ignorant sheep that support Cheetolini will fall for anything.