5 ms·

I provided plenty of points -- you just ignored most of them, the most important one being: the bank CEOs found nothing wrong or no indication of fraud. The loa

I provided plenty of points -- you just ignored most of them, the most important one being: the bank CEOs found nothing wrong or no indication of fraud. The loans are paid off. That testimony should have been enough to nullify the case, full stop. That's enough :) I listed the other semi-related facts as supporting details that ultimately ruin the credibility surrounding each simultaneous case involving Trump, which as I said before, should put into question all of these "indictments" and "charges" against Trump until someone with an actual problem comes forward, instead of playing games abusing the court systems. This is a conspiracy against him, period. The point is: Trump is being attacked recklessly, and those who are attacking him are making huge mistakes that are going to bite them in the ass later. Thus, I do not view any of these cases as credible or plausible, regardless of what "evidence" has been presented. Call it willfully blind, I don't care. The willfully blind are those who refuse to see this abuse of the justice system for what it is, and don't use common sense to see these are attacks, rather than real cases. Why were these not brought up many, many years ago? Why during an election year? Seems rather convenient, don't you think?

CyberDildonics 3y ago
the bank CEOs found nothing wrong or no indication of fraud Do you have a source for that? This is what I found. It says a single banker says they conducted due diligence and cut his net worth estimate in half. https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-civil-fraud-verdict-appeal-may-hinge-no-victims-defense-2024-02-16/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-civil-fraud-verdict-app... Trump admitted on the witness stand in November that his company did not always provide accurate estimates of the value of some of his trophy properties to banks. Trump said the discrepancies did not matter because his estimates bore disclaimers and that he had plenty of cash to back up his loans. A former Trump banker at Deutsche Bank, David Williams, testified in November that conducting due diligence on information clients provided was standard practice. In one instance, the bank adjusted Trump's net worth down to $2.6 billion from the $4.9 billion he reported, Williams said, adding that such a revision was "not unusual or atypical." The state's lawyers are expected during the appeal to offer the same arguments they presented to Engoron. They have said this law can be used to police the integrity of the market generally and does not require complaints from victims. They are expected to emphasize Trump's "outrageous" conduct, including overstating his net worth by as much as $3.6 billion and lying about the size of his own apartment. They also may argue that Trump's case is unusual because few companies are accused of fraud on this scale, according to some legal experts. Trump is being attacked recklessly, Again, what do you think about the massive evidence against him in each case?

CyberDildonics 3y ago

the bank CEOs found nothing wrong or no indication of fraud Do you have a source for that? This is what I found. It says a single banker says they conducted due diligence and cut his net worth estimate in half. https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-civil-fraud-verdict-appeal-may-hinge-no-victims-defense-2024-02-16/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/trumps-civil-fraud-verdict-app... Trump admitted on the witness stand in November that his company did not always provide accurate estimates of the value of some of his trophy properties to banks. Trump said the discrepancies did not matter because his estimates bore disclaimers and that he had plenty of cash to back up his loans. A former Trump banker at Deutsche Bank, David Williams, testified in November that conducting due diligence on information clients provided was standard practice. In one instance, the bank adjusted Trump's net worth down to $2.6 billion from the $4.9 billion he reported, Williams said, adding that such a revision was "not unusual or atypical." The state's lawyers are expected during the appeal to offer the same arguments they presented to Engoron. They have said this law can be used to police the integrity of the market generally and does not require complaints from victims. They are expected to emphasize Trump's "outrageous" conduct, including overstating his net worth by as much as $3.6 billion and lying about the size of his own apartment. They also may argue that Trump's case is unusual because few companies are accused of fraud on this scale, according to some legal experts. Trump is being attacked recklessly, Again, what do you think about the massive evidence against him in each case?