Zat, the reason why I wasn’t directly responding to your post, and instead copying the relevant bits into a quote without a link to the original, is that on my cell phone/ipad it is tiresome to delete the huge blocks of text that were your response to other posters. It isn’t as much of a issue when I am on a pc but I wasn’t. It is much easier when you just directly respond, as you kindly did here, especially with the numbering of points so thank you for that.
1) No, I genuinely cannot think of a Democrat developer in NYC. Real estate isn’t my forte and I live in California. Perhaps you can enlighten me on some developers, especially any who then turned their attention to politics?
2) I don’t think I ever claimed to have any experience in commercial real estate! Which is why I asked “However is it truly standard practice to inflate square footage by 3 times as Trump did with his penthouse? Perhaps you can give examples of people who did that who weren’t charged?”.
I do however presume that the judge did some homework on the issue. You keep on saying that he is wrong but offering no evidence that what Trump did is standard practice.
3) You had posted “In the recent trial since when are NDAs useless unless the court approves them? ”. That is why I brought up Weinstein and how he used them to silence his victims but that it still didn’t stop him from eventually being convicted and the NDAs being used in evidence. You have in this most recent post also brought up NDAs “ ...the guilty republican president who had NDA, settled out of court” so you seem to think them relevant?
I do too as it happens. I think that having the NDA suggested to the jury that Trump did indeed sleep with Daniels and was trying to cover it up. Trump’s lawyer during the trial continued to say that Trump did not sleep with Daniels, just that he had written an NDA and paid her $130k for…..tbh I’m not quite sure what alternate reason he gave for Trump paying a random porn star that he claimed never to have met that amount of money.
4) No I am not “ admitting one person is not guilty as hes democrat and hid the evidencee”.
I am “admiting one person is not guilty as hes hid the evidence”. Notice the absence of the words “he’s a democrat”?
I personally believe that John Edwards was guilty of the same thing that Trump did. And I also believe one of the reasons why a jury did not unanimously find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt is that he did not leave a financial trail behind him. I also think the defense lawyer went with a much smarter strategy of “yes he slept with her, he’s an utter sleaze ball but he didn’t do anything criminal”.
Juries are asked to make their decisions on evidence and a paper trail of 11 invoices, 11 checks and 12 ledger entries is a pretty big one which you constantly avoid admitting.
1: Thats my point, I'm not 'attacking' anyone here you know
How has Trump been the only one brought up on this charge?
As you say, no-one else democrat or republican comes to mind...or even Mr Smith.
Reason being that the charge(s) was ridiculous.
That is why many wealthy entrpreneurs are looking at this and thinking "am i next".
2: The judge seemed totally clueless. From property valuations, tax laws and most amusingly the fact he even distrusted the significant amount of cash placed into a bank -- a US one no less -- showing concern that the funds could me lost in the markets
On the penthouse topic, some things for you to mull over:
A: The penthouse was owned by one of the biggest celebrities in the US, one of the most well known in the world. This carries a premium -- just as buying autographs, or owning the home of Elvis, Michael Jackson or whoever -- some people would pay above asking.
B: As its a branded residence (the brand being Trump) there is a 30% average premium across the market. Thats globally recognised.
C: Trump admitted the figures were 'loose' and 'guesstimates'. When you go to a bank for a loan against property they will themselves appraise the value. In this case they didnt -- ask yourself why? Also, ask yourself, why didnt they complain when the democrats brought this up? Why did they want to continue doing business with Trump and his companies?
The reason is they wanted the business. I have a interest in real estate and its different case by case e.g you can find places that calculate based on land value.
Others of course have premiums based on unit size, views, floor, branding and you can also value as a business based upon revenue (rent and future growth).
I believe in NYC it is typically done on comparable sales prices (same as California) but in this case none are comparable because his carries a premium.
If you watch the agents on the NYC & LA property shows you will frequently see sellers overprice their units. Despite knowing the comparables -- developers also frequently price units vastly higher than the building next door.
This is why its usually a misdemeanor in the US as everyone does it...everyone overvalues their belongings.
The whole thing looks a total mess to me and clearly (as he admitted) his figures were incorrect based on the letter of the law -- but why didnt the bank appraiser do their job? I can pick out a few places where i live and know their values...to a very close degree.
Why didnt the bank negotiate or argue?
Why havent the other developers and home owners that have overvalued property been brought up on similar charges?
That is why I think it is totally ridiculous. From it being the political oppsition driving it, to the bizarre and clueless judge to the charges -- its a joke.
3: I believe that an NDA is between 2 partys. Once both sign -- its set in stone. Like giving your word.
Yes, in the case of Weinstein the crimes were extremely serious...in murder or such situations where its an extreme level of law breaking there can be a case for a judge breaking an NDA.
If however, a judge is going to deem any NDAs irrelevant on a whim then it is ridiculous and any entrepreneur will look at NYC and wonder...
4: If lets say Trump didnt sleep with the porn star but simply paid her off as he could afford to and it would harm his reputation if she broadcast her lies publically and also upset his wife...
...perhaps he chose to do that?
I believe this isnt a one off and many others have done the same.
You believe he did, you also believe the other chap did yet one was punished.
A porn star was first providing details (NDA?) and then now in the trial she inferred that she was in pain or suchlike afterwards....its just not believable to me.
The point being that there is a paper trail of payments (or not) doesnt prove the action.
And that in itself is a political attack on Biden?
Ummm... That sounds familiar.
View attachment 260024
When i mentioned Goebbles in another thread it was called "distasteful"...
Zat and dyslexicbleu should start their own podcast
There are too many online to compete with.
Like calling people who oppose him 'fascists'.
Fascists are those who silence their opposition no?
Like the ones who imprisoned Mandela...
Interesting side you have chosen.