- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So in this civil Trump trial
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:13 am to BBONDS25
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:13 am to BBONDS25
quote:BBond, why are you pretending that the "fraud" ruling was "preponderance" by a fact finder at a bench trial? You are bright- and knowledgeable-enough to know that NONE of that is relevant to the summary judgment ruling.quote:Preponderance of evidence in Front of a biased judge.
It's not alleged. Trump has already lost the case based on the documents. We are merely figuring out the damages at this point.
2
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:16 am to Obtuse1
quote:ding ding dingquote:The problem with this is you are referencing general common law fraud as codified in slightly different iterations across all American jurisdictions. What you either have not read or do not understand is the NY Executive law and the supporting case law. I think it is fair to call it unique.
I was a banker for one of the largest private banks on earth for a decade. there is nothing illegal or fraudulent about estimates made on a financial statement.
quote:Again, ding ding ding.
I am not arguing the case should have been brought or who should prevail just that almost all the discussion I see is predicated on this being a case based on the local jurisdiction's interpretation of common law fraud and that argument is a non sequitur.
This is clearly a case of selective enforcement. Make that case. But the repeated droning about the WRONG LAW is just tiresome.
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:18 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
but you, nor anyone else, have proven anything. All you have is differing opinions about real estate values and usable square footage on some old, non-binding financial statements.
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:18 am to Antoninus
quote:
is just tiresome.
Speaking of tiresome.
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:20 am to Powerman
He isn’t but you are a douchbag!
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:20 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:In Louisiana, it may not be illegal. In MOST states, it may not be illegal.quote:I'm telling you that this is not illegal
So you are saying it's perfectly legal for me to tell a bank my house has been appraised for 5 million dollars when in reality it's been appraised for 300K?
The AG is asserting that it IS illegal in New York, under Executive Law 63(12). This case (and its inevitable appeal) will determine whether she is correct.
This post was edited on 11/7/23 at 10:25 am
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:22 am to oogabooga68
quote:
Shorty Rob would be tearing you a new azzhole right about now...
See your now anchored ShortyRob thread
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:24 am to VOR
Love how you are your fairy men come to these threads and throw shite against the glass to see what sticks. Congrads on your Demtards freaking up what was a great country, freaking douchebag!
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:24 am to Antoninus
quote:
This case (and its inevitable appeal) will determine whether she is correct.
And what a COINCIDENCE that the subject of this maybe correct/maybe not correct case is a Political enemy of the Democrats!
How fking shocking is that!!!
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:26 am to StormDad
quote:
See your now anchored ShortyRob thread
Oh yeah, Rob was awesome.
In one of his most legendary moments he literally tore a certain TD Board Libertarian a new azzhole....
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:26 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
I would explain again that this is a malicious and frivolous lawsuit, but apparently you are one of the posters on this board whose IQ is too low for anything but completely binary thinking. You didn't read it the first time so I wouldn't expect you to read it this time.
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:27 am to Antoninus
Who’s troll are you? Sound like an Aggie bitch.
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:28 am to oogabooga68
quote:
Oh yeah, Rob was awesome
Why yes. Yes I was/am.
See help board. Help me back cause this alter is gonna die pretty quick. LOL
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:28 am to oogabooga68
Another point that may be relevant is LOOK at New York City and all those properties. Trump is far from the only one dealing in real estate and loans.
Has Ms James looked into anyone else? Does she intend to? If not, why not? Does the law only apply to Donald Trump or does it apply to everyone?
Has Ms James looked into anyone else? Does she intend to? If not, why not? Does the law only apply to Donald Trump or does it apply to everyone?
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:29 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:1. EVERYONE knows this.
I could just ignore tf out of you because you dont even understand that banks dont lend 9 figures based on the borrower's "word".
2. It is irrelevant under 63(12)
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:29 am to StormDad
Oh look another alter! 
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:30 am to LSUBALLER
quote:
So in this civil Trump trial
Oh look another alter!
Created SOLELY to beg for reinstatement of my real profile
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:31 am to Warboo
quote:Newsflash: One can acknowledge the existence (and impropriety) of selective enforcement, while still demonstrating that a number of our posters are making REALLY stupid arguments.
So you are saying the "lawfare" is real and justified against OMB.
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:32 am to LSUBALLER
quote:
Who’s troll are you? Sound like an Aggie bitch.
It's Aggie Hank using yet another alter.
Posted on 11/7/23 at 10:33 am to oogabooga68
quote:
It's Aggie Hank using yet another alter.
And it's OBVIOUS and he's not even pretending to hide it.
But I'm killed for more than 20 months????
Page 11 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News