Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[summerisle]

 

[Tommy Chong]

No.

Falsifying assets and income is done to induce the bank to offer a lower interest rate, or to get the loan at all. If the bank received accurate information, odds are it would have made a different decision.

If it offered a lower interest rate, it was cheated out of the correct pricing, and the amount of lost interest income. If it offered a loan at all, it was cheated on risk management. Whether the terms of the loan were honored is immaterial. It's fraud by statute, and for a reason.

But this is just common sense...

@Zatara Let me understand you. If you assault someone, bad enough to put them in the hospital...

But only then, months later after they've healed and are back to being 100%, do they lay a charge of assault of against you.

Would your argument be: Well, they're fixed and healed now, so they're not a victim anymore. There's no crime here, so I'm innocent.
In your logic, the end justifies the means?

 

[Zatara]

But this is just common sense...

@Zatara Let me understand you. If you assault someone, bad enough to put them in the hospital...

But only then, months later after they've healed and are back to being 100%, do they lay a charge of assault of against you.

Would your argument be: Well, they're fixed and healed now, so they're not a victim anymore. There's no crime here, so I'm innocent.
In your logic, the end justifies the means?

If you are using that quote as a reference point...

"If it offered a lower interest rate, it was cheated out of the correct pricing, and the amount of lost interest income"

-- This is simply not true. When you're dealing with large companies, interest rates are not fixed. These are negotiated.

In this case they would be negotiated based upon business level and future business. Not only on the loan itself but across various markets and metrics.

The bank is fine, the bank has stated they have no intent to claim any wrongdoing.

There is no crime. If there is a crime, no one knows what it is.

 

[longers]

To be fair I almost admire the audacity of them calling themselves that.

 

[Bishop Thumpety-Thump]

There is no crime. If there is a crime, no one knows what it is.

Literally everyone else on this forum (with the exception of the Trumpbot who is DEFO an Evertonian) knows exactly what crime was committed.

But here, this should help; https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opin...ict-university-of-sydney-experts-explain.html

 

[Xizor]

In this case they would be negotiated based upon business level and future business. Not only on the loan itself but across various markets and metrics.

And one of those 'metrics' was the false information provided by the Trump Org. You just feel the subsequent fraud shouldn't count as a crime despite it being prosecuted successfully by the courts and decided as such by an independant jury.

You've girded yourself with such rabidly pro-Trump armour here that simple concepts such as this can't penetrate. You cannot conceive of a world where he's actually guilty and so keep twisting these same ridiculous statements into new shapes hoping they'll stick, despite Trump's highly-paid-in-theory lawyers making the same arguments in court and failing to convince anyone.

"If there is a crime, no one knows what it is." ?

You're just repeating Trump campaign propaganda rather than dealing in the substance of the case.

 

[Tommy Chong]

If you are using that quote as a reference point...

"If it offered a lower interest rate, it was cheated out of the correct pricing, and the amount of lost interest income"

-- This is simply not true. When you're dealing with large companies, interest rates are not fixed. These are negotiated.

In this case they would be negotiated based upon business level and future business. Not only on the loan itself but across various markets and metrics.

The bank is fine, the bank has stated they have no intent to claim any wrongdoing.

There is no crime. If there is a crime, no one knows what it is.

There's a reason why it's illegal Zat. The fact the loans got repaid is a moot point.

What if the figures were so materially understated that Trump ended up having to default on the loans?

If he's misstating his figures, there's a good chance that Trump knew this could happen.

Do yourself a favour Zat, go and read up on the WorldCom and Enron scandals and see how bad it can get when companies start fraudulently misstating their numbers.

 

[neil999]

Wait till they introduce you to dave gay and micky latino

 

[Zatara]

And one of those 'metrics' was the false information provided by the Trump Org. You just feel the subsequent fraud shouldn't count as a crime despite it being prosecuted successfully by the courts and decided as such by an independant jury.

You've girded yourself with such rabidly pro-Trump armour here that simple concepts such as this can't penetrate. You cannot conceive of a world where he's actually guilty and so keep twisting these same ridiculous statements into new shapes hoping they'll stick, despite Trump's highly-paid-in-theory lawyers making the same arguments in court and failing to convince anyone.

"If there is a crime, no one knows what it is." ?

You're just repeating Trump campaign propaganda rather than dealing in the substance of the case.

There's a reason why it's illegal Zat. The fact the loans got repaid is a moot point.

What if the figures were so materially understated that Trump ended up having to default on the loans?

If he's misstating his figures, there's a good chance that Trump knew this could happen.

Do yourself a favour Zat, go and read up on the WorldCom and Enron scandals and see how bad it can get when companies start fraudulently misstating their numbers.

I'm yet to be informed of how the banks choosing not to assist the democrats paints the bank as the victim -- seeing as they were on the opposite side of the deal.

Clearly the deal was part of an overall business arrangement. That much is obvious.

I'm also yet to be informed of the TRUE VALUE of the properties as the bank has provided no figures. Because they havent countered.

Worldcom and Enron are two completely unrelated examples of who knows what.

Look at Blackberry, Palm and Nokia.

I feel people are going around in circles here without any facts to support their comments.

 

[Bishop Thumpety-Thump]

I feel people are going around in circles here without any facts to support their comments.

Just the one person.

 

[Tommy Chong]

I'm yet to be informed of how the banks choosing not to assist the democrats paints the bank as the victim -- seeing as they were on the opposite side of the deal.

Clearly the deal was part of an overall business arrangement. That much is obvious.

I'm also yet to be informed of the TRUE VALUE of the properties as the bank has provided no figures. Because they havent countered.

Worldcom and Enron are two completely unrelated examples of who knows what.

Look at Blackberry, Palm and Nokia.

I feel people are going around in circles here without any facts to support their comments.

Hahahaha, of course Zat. The banks are not legally obligated to do any of that.

They probably do not want to be embarrassed by letting the public know how much of a chump Trump made them look by taking them for a ride.

If I was an executive who sat on one the banks board of directors, I would 100% be fuming and would want Trump to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

 

[tsubaki]

If you are using that quote as a reference point...

"If it offered a lower interest rate, it was cheated out of the correct pricing, and the amount of lost interest income"

-- This is simply not true. When you're dealing with large companies, interest rates are not fixed. These are negotiated.

In this case they would be negotiated based upon business level and future business. Not only on the loan itself but across various markets and metrics.

The bank is fine, the bank has stated they have no intent to claim any wrongdoing.

There is no crime. If there is a crime, no one knows what it is.

Surely even you must recognise that if you misrepresent the true state of affairs / outright lie in those negotiations for your own financial benefit then it is a fraud?

I mean it was a fraud, and widely accepted as being fraud, when people lied / were encouraged to lie on their mortgage applications that led up to the 2008 crash. It is a fraud when firms lie to their accountants too, even with the accounting firm’s knowledge.

 

[Zatara]

Hahahaha, of course Zat. The banks are not legally obligated to do any of that.

They probably do not want to be embarrassed by letting the public know how much of a chump Trump made them look by taking them for a ride.

If I was an executive who sat on one the banks board of directors, I would 100% be fuming and would want Trump to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Have you ever worked in the banking or financial markets industries?

 

[Tommy Chong]

Have you ever worked in the banking or financial markets industries?

Indeed Zat. I was in auditing for almost 6 years.

And to add to that, if I was the auditor who signed off on the financial statements that Trump then fraudulently misstated to get those loans, I'd be fuming too.

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

And one of those 'metrics' was the false information provided by the Trump Org. You just feel the subsequent fraud shouldn't count as a crime despite it being prosecuted successfully by the courts and decided as such by an independant jury.

You've girded yourself with such rabidly pro-Trump armour here that simple concepts such as this can't penetrate. You cannot conceive of a world where he's actually guilty and so keep twisting these same ridiculous statements into new shapes hoping they'll stick, despite Trump's highly-paid-in-theory lawyers making the same arguments in court and failing to convince anyone.

"If there is a crime, no one knows what it is." ?

You're just repeating Trump campaign propaganda rather than dealing in the substance of the case.

What a post

@Zatara read the above post and learn