Below is my column in The Hill on the $355 million verdict against Trump and his corporation in New York. The damages in my view are excessive and absurd after the court acknowledged that no one lost a dime in these exchanges. Indeed, the “victims” wanted to do more business with Trump and made handsome profits. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has rushed to assure businesses that there is “nothing to worry about” after the corporate public execution of Trump and his company. The assumption seems to be that you have nothing to fear from confiscatory actions unless you are Trump in New York. That is precisely why the New York Court of Appeals should act to redeem the integrity of the legal system by setting aside or drastically reducing this award.
Here is the column:
In laying the foundation for his sweeping decision against former President Donald Trump, Judge Arthur Engoron observed that “this is a venial sin, not a mortal sin.” Yet, at $355 million, one would think that Engoron had found Trump to be the source of Original Sin.
The judgment against Trump (and his family and associates) was met with a level of unrestrained celebration by many in New York that bordered on the indecent. Attorney General Letitia James declared not only that Trump would be barred from doing business in New York for three years, but that the damages would come to roughly $460 million once interest was included.
That makes the damages against Trump greater than the gross national product of some countries, including Micronesia. Yet the court admitted that not a single dollar was lost by the banks from these dealings. Indeed, witnesses testified that they wanted to do more business with Trump, who was described as a “whale” client with high yield business opportunities.
Undervaluing and overvaluing property is a longstanding practice in New York real estate. The forms submitted by the Trump organization cautioned the banks to do their own estimates and the loans were paid in full and on time. Yet, the New York law used by James is a curiosity because it does not actually require a victim. Indeed, everyone can make ample profits and still allow for an investigation into “repeated fraudulent or illegal acts.”
Having campaigned on bagging Trump on any basis, James turned the law into a virtual license to hunt him down along with his family and his associates.
Engoron proved the perfect judge for the case. The opinion itself seems almost cathartic for the jurist who struggled with Trump inside and outside of court. In the judgment, Engoron fulfilled Oscar Wilde’s rule that the only way to be rid of temptation is to yield to it. He ordered everything short of throwing Trump into a wood chipper.
The size of the damages is grotesque and should shock the conscience of any judge on appeal. Even if the Democrat-appointed judges on the New York Court of Appeals were to ignore the obvious inequity and unfairness, the United States Supreme Court could intervene.
State courts tend to get a significant amount of deference in the interpretation of their own laws. After all, if New York wants to turn Wall Street into a remake of “The Hunger Games,” it has only itself to blame as other businesses flee the state.
The impact on New York business is likely to be dire. New York is already viewed as a hostile business environment, with the top end of its tax base literally heading south as taxes and crime rises. This draconian award is only going to deepen concerns over the arbitrary application of the law by figures like James, who previously sought to disband the National Rifle Association. (She has shown less interest in cracking down on liberal organizations like Black Lives Matter or the National Action Network of Al Sharpton despite their own major financial scandals.)
As James gleefully uses this law to break up a major New York corporation, it is hard to imagine many businesses rushing to the Big Apple. This follows Democratic politicians such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) campaigning against Amazon seeking to open new facilities in the city. After this week, drawing new businesses to the city is going to be about as easy as selling country estates during the French Revolution.
The one hope for New York businesses may be the U.S. Supreme Court. Despite the deference afforded to the states and their courts, the court has occasionally intervened to block excessive damage awards.
For example, in 1996, the justices limited state-awards of punitive damages under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In that case, BMW was found to have repainted luxury cars damaged in transit without telling buyers.
An Alabama jury awarded $4,000 in compensatory damages for the loss of value in having a factory paint job, but then added $4 million in punitive damages. Even when the Alabama Supreme Court reduced that to $2 million, the U.S. Supreme Court still found it excessive. Even liberals on the Court such as John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer agreed that such “grossly excessive” awards raise a “basic unfairness of depriving citizens of life, liberty, or property, through the application of arbitrary coercion.”
The court may find almost half a billion dollars in damages without a single lost dollar from a victim to be a tad excessive.
That prospect will not dampen the thrill-kill environment in New York this week. In electing openly partisan prosecutors such as James and District Attorney Alvin Bragg, voters have shown a preference for political prosecutions and investigations.
In “Bonfire of the Vanities,” Tom Wolfe wrote about Sherman McCoy, a successful businessman who had achieved the status of one of the “masters of the universe” in New York. In the prosecution of McCoy for a hit-and-run, Wolfe described a city and legal system devouring itself in the politics of class and race. The book details a businessman’s fall from a great height — a fall that delighted New Yorkers.
It is doubtful Trump will end up as the same solitary figure wearing worn-out clothes before the Bronx County Criminal Court clutching a binder of legal papers. But you do not have to feel sorry or even sympathetic for Trump to see this award as obscene. The appeal will test the New York legal system to see if other judges can do what Judge Engoron found so difficult: set aside their feelings about Trump.
New York is one of our oldest and most distinguished bars. It has long resisted those who sought to use the law to pursue political opponents and unpopular figures. It will now be tested to see if those values transcend even Trump.
Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.
Prof. Turley, can you explain how the State of NY could use violations of its penal law (false documents, etc.) as a legal basis for civil law claims and recovery against Trump Organization yet use the lower civil burden of proof. Enrogon’s decision doesn’t really explain how he granted civil remedies for penal law violations.
He didn’t. The penalty is solely for a civil violation. Like every state I know of, New York has both criminal and civil laws against fraud.
The case presided over by Engoron had criminal aspects. Civil law is supposed to be compensatory and criminal is supposed to be punitive. Yet this case resulted in financial penalties far in excess of any compensation (in fact, there was no compensable loss). Further, it sought to control Trump’s future behavior, e.g., a prohibition on conducting business for three years. This kind of personal control is the not the proper role of a common law judge.
“. . . the $355 million verdict against Trump . . .” (JT)
That decree by a judge’s scepter is legalized theft — rationalized by an ex post facto, bureaucratic diktat of what the loan terms should have been.
If you’re in New York, hold on to your wallet and children. Better yet: Flee to a *non*-People’s State.
Here is a wonderful short analysis of the decision, and this guy eviscerates Engeron! Very watchable and funny:
In a different article Turley said that Trump must pay the fine in total before he can appeal. Due to NY law.
I wonder if SCOTUS can step in.
Cause if he does sell businesses to pay the fine…
And it will be overturned…
NY will end up w a major lawsuit by Trump on their hands due to damage.
The alternative … he gets a loan. Still massive damages against the state.
Engoron would face risk along w James and the State.
Going to get interesting…
Turley mentioned the punitive damage case. I have defended many such cases. Punitive damages are akin to the civil fine levied agains Trump. To pass constitutional muster, the award must bear a reasonable relationship to the amount of actual damages. The Supreme Court has suggested a single digit multiplier (actual damages to punitives). As I understand it, the judge’s order admitted no one was damaged. That ought to be sufficient grounds to reverse the NY judgment and render judgement for Trump.
Make of it what you will, here is an argument explaining the judge’s decision:
“How a New York Judge Arrived at a Staggering ‘Disgorgement’ Order Against Trump”
https://reason.com/2024/02/19/how-a-judge-arrived-at-a-staggering-disgorgement-order-against-trump/
The second paragraph of that article appears to summarize the issue as follows:
“On its face, a penalty of nearly half a billion dollars is hard to fathom given that no lender or insurer claimed it suffered a financial loss as a result of the transactions at the center of the case, which was brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. But the law under which James sued Trump and his co-defendants does not require any such loss. The money demanded by Engoron’s 92-page decision, which goes to the state rather than individual claimants, is styled not as damages but as ‘disgorgement’ of ‘ill-gotten gains.’ It aims not to compensate people who were allegedly harmed by Trump’s misrepresentations but to deter dishonesty that threatens ‘the financial marketplace’.”
Taking that argument at face value, it seems to say that compensatory damages (actual damages) are neither necessary nor relevant under this New York law. So it seems to me that it’s actually the New York LAW that needs to be challenged as much as the specific issues of this case.
It looks like the New York law at issue replaces compensatory or actual damages with THEORETICAL damages. If I’m correct about that, it should be a pretty easy case for the Supreme Court to dispense with.
I read the piece yesterday. Instead of fraud. The damages require an entity got a better deal that he was due. A Judge, has determined despite testimony from the Bank, that Trump got a deal he did not deserve. Considering, a wide range of variables that go to motivations between two parties entering a private contract, the Government, with ZERO predicate can determine the govt is due hundreds of $millions for an undefinable, impossible to predict, wrong. If I remember right, the reduced interests rate on $125 million loan generated undue savings to Trump of $350 million
We have to remember at the time of the loan, mortgage rates were in the 3% range. Meaning a break of 1% would have been a reduction of 1/3 and netted $1.25 million ill gotten gains per year.
That morphed into $350 million in damages and the ABILITY of the govt to force the sale of all his NY Businesses.
We are still waiting for a single case where the consumer was the target of this law. The law was written to protect consumers from lenders
The government investigates crimes NOT PEOPLE
James had no predicate to launch this investigation. She used the power of the Govt to compel private entities to share private documents with zero predicate. Corrupt judges had to be involved in that also.
Banks are “big boys” who are certainly capable of taking care of themselves, unlike the parasite “crowd” you carouse with – “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
If I had the chance to say something to Arthur Engoron, this is what I would say. It is from an old movie, Judgment at Nuremburg, starring Spencer Tracy, as an American Judge, and Burt Lancaster, as Ernst Janning, a German Judge, who knew better, but went along with the Nazis, and allowed his court to become a political tool.
===========
Judge Dan Haywood : Herr Janning, you may proceed.
Ernst Janning : I wish to testify about the Feldenstein case because it was the most significant trial of the period. It is important not only for the tribunal to understand it, but for the whole German people. But in order to understand it, one must understand the period in which it happened. There was a fever over the land, a fever of disgrace, of indignity, of hunger. We had a democracy, yes, but it was torn by elements within. Above all there was fear, fear of today, fear of tomorrow, fear of our neighbors, and fear of ourselves. Only when you understand that can you understand what Hitler meant to us, because he said to us: “Lift your heads. Be proud to be German. There are devils among us, communists, liberals, Jews, gypsies. Once these devils will be destroyed your misery will be destroyed.” It was the old, old story of the sacrificial lamb.
What about those of us who knew better, we who knew the words were lies and worse than lies? Why did we sit silent? Why did we take part? Because we loved our country. What difference does it make if a few political extremists lose their rights? What difference does it make if a few racial minorities lose their rights? It is only a passing phase. It is only a stage we are going through. It will be discarded sooner or later. Hitler himself will be discarded – sooner or later. The country is in danger. We will march out of the shadows! We will go forward. FORWARD is the great password. And history tells how well we succeeded, Your Honor. We succeeded beyond out wildest dreams. The very elements of hate and power about Hitler that mesmerized Germany, mesmerized the world. We found ourselves with sudden powerful allies. Things that had been denied to us as a democracy were open to us now.
The world said, “Go ahead. Take it. Take it! Take Sudetenland! Take the Rhineland! Re-militarize it! Take all of Austria! Take it!” And then, one day we looked around and found that we were in an even more terrible danger. The ritual begun in this courtroom swept over the land like a raging, roaring disease. What was going to be a “passing phase” had become the way of life. Your Honor, I was content to sit silent during this trial. I was content to tend my roses. I was even content to let counsel try to save my name, until I realized that in order to save it, he would have to raise the specter again. You have seen him do it. He has done it, here, in this courtroom.
He has suggested that the Third Reich worked for the benefit of people. He has suggested that we sterilized men for the welfare of the country. He has suggested that perhaps the old Jew did sleep with the 16 year old girl after all. Once more, it is being done – for love of country. It is not easy to tell the truth. But if there is to be any salvation for Germany, we who know our guilt must admit it – whatever the pain and humiliation. I had reached my verdict on the Feldenstein case before I ever came into the courtroom. I would have found him guilty, whatever the evidence. It was not a trial at all. It was a sacrificial ritual in which Feldenstein, the Jew, was the helpless victim.
Hans Rolfe : Your Honor, I must interrupt. The defendant is not aware of what he’s saying. He’s not aware of the implications!
Ernst Janning : I am aware. I am aware! My counsel would have you believe we were not aware of the concentration camps. Not aware. Where were we? Where were we when Hitler began shrieking his hate in Reichstag? Where were we when our neighbors were being dragged out in the middle of the night to Dachau? Where were we when every village in Germany has a railroad terminal where cattle cars were filled with children being carried out to their extermination! Where were we when they cried out in the night to us. Deaf, dumb, blind!
Hans Rolfe : Your Honor, I must protest!
Ernst Janning : My counsel says we were not aware of the extermination of the millions. He would give you the excuse: We were only aware of the extermination of the hundreds. Does that make us any the less guilty? Maybe we didn’t know the details. But if we didn’t know, it was because we didn’t want to know.
Emil Hahn : Traitor! Traitor!
Judge Dan Haywood : Order! Order! Order! Put that man back in his seat and keep him there.
Ernst Janning : I am going to tell them the truth. I am going to tell them the truth if the whole world conspires against it. I am going to tell them the truth about their Ministry of Justice. Werner Lammpe, an old man who cries into his Bible now, an old man who profited by the property expropriation of every man he sent to a concentration camp. Friedrich Hofstetter, the “good German” who knew how to take orders, who sent men before him to be sterilized like so many digits. Emil Hahn, the decayed, corrupt bigot, obsessed by the evil within himself. And Ernst Janning, worse than any of them because he knew what they were, and he went along with them. Ernst Janning: Who made his life excrement, because he walked with them.
=============
After reading that to him, then I would say this:
I had reached my verdict on the Trump case before I ever came into the courtroom. I would have found him guilty, whatever the evidence. It was not a trial at all. It was a sacrificial ritual in which Trump, the Republican, was the helpless victim.
Here is a clip from the movie, Judge Ernst Jannings’ testimony:
Excellent reference, thank you. I’ve probably watched this movie a half a dozen times in the past year, and your reference to the Feldenstein case is spot-on.
BTW, have you been following Masters of the Air by any chance? It features a lawyer-turned-Liberator pilot, Rosie Rosenthal, whose penultimate mission to Berlin resulted in the death of Roland Freisler,. Freisler was known for his Third Reich kangaroo courts and who may have inspired the character Emil Hahn.
Engoron reminds me of Freisler.
I have not heard of Masters of the Air, but I am going to look it up! Thank you for the reference!
(Slight correction: Flying Fortress, not Liberator.)
The judicial branch and Supreme Court are terminally contaminated.
Business owners that can leave New York are probably planning their escape, at least considering options or are on their way out. New businesses pondering New York are likely having second thoughts. Thugs can beat up policemen without consequences. Drug dealers are largely left unpunished and a corrupt legal system is wildly out of control.
How sad and tragic.
To All:
Before I go to bed tonite, I wish to apologize for a mistaken statement I made earlier today, to wit, that “some” of the noted violations did not require intent/scienter/ or reliance. I have now reviewed the entire 92 pages and the appurtenant laws/statutes.
True about reliance. Not so true as to intent, and I have NO idea what I looked at this morning that led me to that statement. NowI cannot find or remember what I saw/read. Somewhere I was certain that making a false statement or submitting a false document did not require intent. I have no idea where I saw that, cannot find it now, and I apologize to all. More than an “ooops.” (Everything else I said, I stand by.)
Now I lay me down to sleep.
I Pray my error you do not keep
And if I die before I wake
I pray you do not send me to NY.
yours truly, lin.
Lin, not to worry, your comments are appreciated by most of us and being sent to NY violates the 8th Amendment.
LOL!
hullbobby: thanks for taking time to kindly comment. Today, processing my mistake and re-reading my comment(s) from yesterday, I think my comments were directed toward disgorgement (used in both civil and criminal cases, and no intent/scienter to commit fraud need be established, as it is used for both illegal and “unethical” business transactions… especially in SEC actions (which I am familiar with). so I am correct that the equitable remedy of disgorgement can be used without attempted or actual fraud.
But where I goofed is where I quoted 175.45 as an example?????.
—N.O.T.
Yikes. I likely was quickly referring to 175.15 (no intent/scienter) in my quick perusal of the 175 violations, but even a full reading of that requires an absence of personal benefit.
luckily, I never made a mistake like that in actual filings, cuz you don’t shoot from the hip in those, ha ha.
P.S. don’t remember Bobby Hull, but remember hearing his name alot in the background as my dad and brother watched (and played) amateur hockey. I also remember hearing “toronto maple leaf” alot. I was veddy veddy young, but I remember thinking Gordie Howe was handsome.)
Thanks again.
A valuation can’t be false as it is merely an estimate
Under this asinine ruling, a person could sue every auction house in ny who gave a valuation on a piece of art which did not sell for the appraised value, claiming they were mislead about their potential profit by not getting the full valuation
…and every property presented on Zillow.
Turley’s articles, and the ensuing comment sections, were much better — more intelligent and well-reasoned — back when this was a LEGAL blog, as opposed to the POLITICAL blog that it’s become.
Once upon a time — not all that long ago in the larger scheme of things — readers were informed by Turley’s articles of various happenings in the courts, and commenters chipped in their own knowledge and REASONED opinions of the legal ramifications.
Now the blog has become mostly politics, and the comment section has degenerated into a Three-Stooges pie fight between MORONS arguing issues that are democrat & RINO political POLICIES vs republican political POLICIES, all of which for the most part have a tenuous connection to actual issues of LAW.
There IS such a thing as LEGAL expertise — derived from knowledge of the relevant FACTS and application of the relevant principles of LAW, but there’s no such thing as POLITICAL PUNDIT expertise, because political punditry is often based on misrepresentation concerning which facts are applicable combined with semantic attempts to taylor the facts to fit a political agenda.
It’s possible that this blog got out of control of its own volition or momentum, but it’s also possible that the shift from law to politics was a conscious decision made for a variety of motives. In any case, the result is an inferior blog and an often-silly comment section.
If you want good legal analysis, there are other places to go (Volokh, prawfsblawg, electionlawblog, …). You’re right, this isn’t one of them.
Haha… nooooo!
Agreed about Volokh, but there are issues there as well. I would call it “better” legal analysis, not necessarily “good.” It’s difficult to attach a score when it comes to legal analysis, but Volokh’s assessment appears to usually be the result of considerable back-and-forth argument with others prior to publication.
Not familiar with the others you mentioned.
One of the more interesting aspects of The Volokh Conspiracy is that there is absolutely no consensus. Wildly differing takes on the same laws, cases and briefs, and judicial opinions are always in evidence, and argued there.
Calibressie at Volokh lays out the facts on how corrupt this who thing is.
Orrin Kerr offers an opposite opinion, admitting he has not studied the facts or the law.
Kerr did not admit either thing.
Anonymous, you know what I do when I don’t like some blog, program, magazine, newspaper etc…I stop going to the blog, I change the channel, I end my subscription and I stop picking up the paper. Try it, you won’t be missed.
LOL — It looks like Turley’s dishonest hall monitor REMOVED my reply to your dishonest nonsense, hired Turley-troll.
You personify EVERYTHING that’s sick and disgusting about Turlery’s comment section.
Anonymous – It is difficult to separate law and politics when the legal system is being used to destroy your political opponents and rigg elections.
Actually, the US legal system is DESIGNED to separate legal issues from politics. Separating law from politics is what judges are THEORETICALLY supposed to do, because there IS a difference between LAW and POLITICS. It’s always been that way. The need to separate law from politics isn’t something that’s just sprung up in the Trump era or the 21th Century, or 20th Century, or even the 19th Century. It’s been there from the beginning, and is part of the reason that America was invented in the first place.
So you contend that the Trump case would settled entirely on matters of fact and law. I’d say you’d have to be exceptionally wholly purblind to reach that conclusion. You’re welcome to your opinion though I confess your comments are not enlightening in the least. But it’s absolutely churlish and philistine to attack those who detect extraneous political agendas at work here that really jeopardize the status of the law and the legitimacy of the political order.
I feel the same about ZeroHedge, which in its founding years was the best financial news site on the planet.
It’s morphed into a political site with the occasional gem of reporting regarding financial matters. The comments have suffered the same fate as you claim have happened here (just a visitor here – so I can’t speak to that).
I think it’s a symptom of the ever-expanding State. Nothing is off-limits because our politicians don’t respect the limits set out for them in The Constitution.
As the merger of corporate and state power intensifies (actual fascism), this trend will only accelerate.
‘Undervaluing and Overvaluing Property is a longstanding practice in New York real estate. …
Yet, the New York law used by James is a curiosity because it does not actually require a victim. Indeed, everyone can make ample profits and still allow for an investigation into “repeated fraudulent or illegal acts.” ”
Well that’s great! Lets go after All the CRE in NYC and lobby for No More Bailouts of Commercial Lending Banks that facilitate the “Trickery” that Trump is being held as Ground-Zero for. After all there are at least a few Associate Accomplices involved in this business. It like a CRE-RICO situation. This is not sarcasm,
Let Us see how far the edicts of Judge Arthur Engoron and Attorney General Letitia James go.
After all if Trump is the lone source of this Evil, then the Others will have not to worry as New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has assured.
I want to see if Judge Arthur Engoron and Attorney General Letitia James go after -1- of these Organizations like They did the Trump org..
There should not be a single Player under-water if they in fact didn’t “Overvalue” their Assets on a Loan application.
Some $929 billion in commercial real estate loans will come due in 2024
About 14% of all CRE loans and 44% of office loans appear to be underwater
Recent study warns of widespread risk of bank failures if defaults spike to 10%
More than $2.2 trillion in debt is maturing before 2028, and much of that will have to be refinanced at higher rates according to the WSJ.
A list might be in Order of the Other Syndicate ‘Bad Apples’:
𝐍𝐘𝐂’𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬
1. SL Green
2. Vornado Realty Trust
3. Related Companies
4. Tishman Speyer (Look Here Engoron/James!)
5. The Durst Organization
6. Boston Properties
7. Rudin Management Company
8. Silverstein Properties
9. RXR Realty
10. Brookfield Properties
[Link] metro-manhattan.com/blog/these-are-the-biggest-commercial-real-estate-landlords-in-nyc/
𝐍𝐘𝐂’𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐀𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐭 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐬
1. Citadel Property Management Corp.
2. CBRE
3. Cushman & Wakefield
4. JLL (Jones Lang LaSalle)
5. Newmark Knight Frank
6. Savills
7. Transwestern
8. Avison Young
9. Eastern Consolidated
10. GFI Realty Services
11. Compass
12. Lee & Associates
[Link] citadelnyc.com/blog/top-12-commercial-real-estate-brokers-in-new-york/
𝐍𝐘𝐂’𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬
1. Deutsche Bank
2. Signature Bank
3. JP Morgan Chase
4. Wells Fargo
5. New York Community Bank
[Link] commercialrealestate.loans/top-5-commercial-lenders-in-new-york/
𝐖𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐱𝐭 𝐛𝐚𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐬?
Commercial real estate ‘debt bomb’ of $929 billion comes due this year with HUNDREDS of banks facing insolvency runs if default rates on the loans spike
By: Keith Griffith – Dailymail.com ~ February 17th 2024
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13084051/commercial-real-estate-banking-crisis-office-space.html
[Link] aol.com/commercial-real-estate-trouble-could-171617368.html
𝐍𝐘𝐂 is just the tip of a Himalayan Iceberg when you weigh in Cities from the East Coast to the West Coast (America).
Engoron & James should be Tared & Feathered and forced to pay what Trump will.
Fantastic post! I think I saw in the decision that one of the lenders regularly applied a 50% haircut to all appraisals. Why would they do that if there were not a boatload of over-appraisals from many different people.
Floyd, my perspective is NOT the assets are overvalued. There a maybe 2 dozen, ‘measurable’ varibles taken into consideration at any defined point in time. At least that many immeasurable.
2 home real estate stories
My bother ran into a real estate agent he knew on the street. The agent said a house was for sale he might want. He said in passing enless it less than XXX he’s not interested. Just to shut him up. The agent got him to sign an offer with a one week expiration. He left for vacation that day and found out he bought a house when he got home. The owner is guilty of overvaluing the property?
I had a farmer customer that went to his Minnesota lack cabin through out the season. He had an agent that would not leave him alone, and wanted to list the cabin. Finally to shut him up he just 10X that last cabin he heard sell, that was much more valuble than his. When he got home the sales paperwork was waiting for him. He was forced to by an 8 plex rental to keep the money from the govt. If he had used the sale price in his net worth, he would have been guilt in this case
Iknowo little of NYC commercial real estate. But I am very well versed in Iowa Farm Ground. Valuing that is a wild card.
Trump On Navalny’s Death:
It’s About ‘Me’
@realDonaldTrump
The sudden death of Alexei Navalny has made me more and more aware of what is happening in our Country. It is a slow, steady progression, with CROOKED, Radical Left Politicians, Prosecutors, and Judges leading us down a path to destruction. Open Borders, Rigged Elections, and Grossly Unfair Courtroom Decisions are DESTROYING AMERICA. WE ARE A NATION IN DECLINE, A FAILING NATION! MAGA2024
………………………………..
Trump posted the above statement on his own Truth Social at 5:00 am this morning.
Now compare that statement to the passages below from Judge Engoron’s opinion as reported by ABC News:
Judge Arthur Engoron excoriated Trump, saying the president’s credibility was “severely compromised,” that the frauds “shock the conscience” and that Trump and his co-defendants showed a “complete lack of contrition and remorse” that he said “borders on pathological.”
………………………………
See that?? “A complete lack of contrition and remorse” that he said “borders on pathological.”
Trump doesn’t care about Alexei Navalny’s death nor does he even pretend to care. Instead his main thrust is presenting himself as a similar type of martyr.
And Trump is still banging the ‘rigged election’ drum without any proof that any elections were rigged against him. That’s a lack of contrition bordering on pathological!
I think you think you are still posting on yahoo. This is a nice site we hate to see thread crapped over.
There is nothing that Trump should feel contrition for, except perhaps for ever trying to do business in NYC.
*And Trump is still banging the ‘rigged election’ drum*
You mean besides the Twitter files, 51 corrupt intelligence officials, and the suppression of Hunter’s laptop?
The value of anything is what you can sell it for, end of story. I am so sick of these bureaucratic blow hards that can’t differentiate between a dollar created by taxation and a dollar created by free commerce.
The way I read it if you list a home for sale at let’s say $500,000.00 and the bank is only willing to loan $400,000.00 for the house have you committed a fraud according to the state of New York?
If I wear a MAGA hat sell a used car over blur book they are going to come after me and my family.
It doesn’t matter if they wear funny robes or track suits the mob always gets its money.
Floyd is Estovir, of course. But we’re not supposed to know.
I wish. From what I hear, Estovir is a manly-man, with good looks, a sharp brain, ready fists, and quick wits. I, on the other hand, am old and feeble, a shadow of my former self, alone in the world, and forsaken. For fun, I read Chauncey Tinker’s 1910 translation of Beowulf, and wonder, “Do I dare eat a peach?”
Anonymously stupid
So how much did American taxpayers lose while the Biden’s evaded federal income tax? The idea of what Trump did constitutes fraud to the lenders is ridiculous. Every bank does their own due diligence on property appraisals and performs a proforma on the deal before they execute. This is nothing more than a political third world hit job, it will not stand.
The trucker ‘Chicago Ray’ who posted the viral video calling for a trucker boycott of NYC has now backed down and changed his mind, deleting the video and issuing a retraction.
der Siebenschläfer:
There *are* “victims” in Trump’s financial fraud—
• the windfall in discounted interest Trump swindled lenders out of $168MM *just since 2019*
• fraudulent tax deductions cost taxpayers around $100MM
• Trump used bank fraud to pay the $25MM Trump University judgment, which involved many victims
link: https://bsky.app/profile/sababausa.bsky.social/post/3klrimqwxjy2f
Seems like Pelosi has a house in Florida, I think there may be fraud in her purchase, we better investigate.
And Florida has a Republican AG! So why don’t Republicans spend their time doing political crap like this? Because they actually govern, instead of letting their state go to the dogs (either literally for figuratively). Republicans do the work, democrats play the games.
LOL. The House Republicans haven’t passed any bills in a year. They tanked the border bill and managed to help elect another Democrat in a special election. What actual work are they doing?
“The House Republicans haven’t passed any bills in a year.” Oddly enough, it seems that they have passed two bills just since 1/1/24: HR 7024 (tax relief for working Americans) and HR 185 (lifting requirements of proof of COVID vaccinations for foreign travelers). https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/
OK, here is a scenario: Donald Trump owns Action Comic#1, the first appearance of Superman. It was printed in 1938, and is in fine condition. It is worth about $2.5 Million, according to Trump. He seeks a loan for $1.25 Million, collateralized by the comic book. This is in 2012.
The Bank, calls Bob, an expert in rare comics, to appraise the book. Bob inspects the book (very carefully) and determines it to be worth $1,750,000. As Bob writes in appraisal, “Prices for this book have gone up and down over the years. One recently sold for $2.5 million on ebay, but other sales have ranged from $1.5 million to $2 million. With Superman turning gay, the price may go up some, and it may go down,”
The Bank loans Trump the money. Trump pays the loan back. Letitia James finds out about this deal and takes Trump to court 12 years later, for over-valuing his comic book.
Ask yourself, how much did the interest rate on the loan change after Bob appraised the book? If the book had been worth $2.5 Million, and the loan would have been 200% secured, would the interest rate be 4%, as opposed to say 5% if the book were only 140% of the loan value? Maybe, because the risk was higher? But if so, how did the bank lose money, because they loaned the money after their own appraisal, at a higher rate. The bank actually made 1% extra by going with their own appraisal.
What James has done is try to take the 1% Interest Differential, and turn that into an “attempted fraud amount”, arguing that if Trump had his way, he would have profited by that 1%. But they are doing this without any underlying substantive idea what the comic was actually worth. Another appraiser might have said, $2.5 Million, because that is a current price on ebay. (I thought about buying it myself, but I have $200 electric bill due in a few days.)
All real estate appraisals are somewhat speculative in nature. What lenders look for is adequate collateralization, and an ability to repay the loan, which Trump provided. And, if they loaned on a lower collateralization ratio, due to a lower appraisal, then they would have charged more interest, not less.
The court relied on witness testimony rather than constructing imaginary situations like this. Those witnesses testified, inter alia, that they made the loans in question because of Trump’s SFCs. Which further evidence proved were fraudulent.
Why do you spend so much time writing about imaginary examples rather than simply reading the opinion? The summary of the third-party witnesses starts about page 7 and is about 10-15 pages long, IIRC.
I use imaginary scenarios, to make the concepts easier to understand. Most Americans, and more than a fair share of lawyers, are math deficit, and could no more tell a debit from a credit, than Ketanji Brown can tell you what a woman is. The difference between a compilation and an audit, or a review, would not be something that clicks with them. So, I try to make it understandable. What was it, an 80+ page decision. What average person is going to read that? As far as I know, the third party witnesses were pretty happy dealing with Trump, and made a lot of money. And again, as far as what things are worth, that is not set in concrete. That is why the parties had to negotiate. Overall, I think Trump personally guaranteed the loans, and if some property was a few million off, no big deal. There was plenty of collateral, and Trump was not dealing with unsophisticated rubes somewhere in rural West Virginia. He was dealing with commercial lenders, who knew what they were doing. And nobody lost any money. And, is there anything you find misleading about the imaginary scenario?
The lenders lost interest they otherwise would have been paid.
The public lost taxes that otherwise would have been collected.
“The lenders lost interest they otherwise would have been paid.”
Nobody knows that. A lender might say, “I would have charged a higher interest rate if I had known. ”
Trump might have then said, “I do not like your rate, so I am going to check out Bob, over at Smart Bank!”
Bob, at Smart Bank, then jumps at the chance to do business with Trump, and since Trump is personally guaranteeing the loan, is happy with collateral! “Hey!”, he says, “I got a good solid loan, at a decent interest rate!”
You see, that is why the “damages” are so speculative. You are judging a deal that is already done, where agreement has been reached, and then changing the interest factor, a major item, and assuming the deal would have gone through anyway.
This is about the same as people who try to change the terms of a contract, after the contract is signed. Going outside the four corners of the document, as it were.
The original lender then would have had that money to lend out at the higher rate to someone else.
What lender says that it was victimized? Who knows their business better, you or them?
Says who, that they would have had less money to loan out? The country was drowning in money, at ZIRP rates.
Here is an alternative conjecture for you! If not Trump, the bank would have loaned money to Sam Bankman-Fried, and their money would have been lost forever, somewhere on the Dark Web, financing drug deals, arms sales, and loser-a$$ Woke movies.
Anonymous, the lender still had money to lend to other borrowers, they didn’t give Trump their last dollar. Cripes sake, the judge was vindictive, the decision is unconstitutional, the AG and the judge announced they were going after Trump and now the governor says other businesses have nothing to worry about because they aren’t trump.
Stop defending this miscarriage of justice, it is helping Trump, hurting NY and will be overturned and greatly reduced. Man, politics make some people defend the most rediculous things and that goes for many Trump supporters as well.
Either it is politics and you are a partisan hack or you are just another contrarian weirdo.
What the lenders MIGHT have said doesn’t matter. The banks all testified that they suffered no losses, and that the property values were affirmed by their own independent appraisals. That’s known as the “best evidence rule,” with no speculation.
No, actually, they didn’t all say that. Which you’d know if you read the actual ruling, citing evidence from the trial.
You are engaging in speculation. Stupid f*cking New Yorkers….
I don’t understand how the public lost tax revenue? Jurisdictions have independent assessors regardless of what the bank states. Plus if the loans were at a higher interest rate, Trump could have deducted more on his taxes.
The longer a legal opinion, the more likely it is weak on facts, law and reasoning. Quantity compensates for quality.
No they didn’t, the bank specifically said on the stand that the banks did their own due diligence .
Jonathan: There was a time when DJT was considered the “King” of real estate in NY. Not anymore. And it has little to do with Judge Engoron’s judgment.
Business Insider has a report today entitled: “Trump-branded properties are selling for less than buildings that removed his name”. Turns out Manhattan condos with the Trump brand (e.g., Trump Tower) have seen a 49% drop in the average price per sq. foot since 2013. Condos that removed the “Trump” logo have increased increased in value. According to BI between 2013 and 2023 the drop in value was 23%. During the same period the owners of condos without the “Trump” name saw a 9% uptick in value. The BI report does not cover other properties owned by DJT outside of Manhattan.
So when the real estate market speaks everyone pays close attention. There could be soon a fire-sale on “Trump”-branded condos in Manhattan and an opportunity when it is a buyer’s market. Just a bit of advice for all the big time real estate investors on this blog. But a warning. If you buy one of Trump’s condos you should probably remove the name “Trump” as the first order of business.
Check out the mediabias poll reports at the bottom of the page: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/business-insider/
67% rate Business Insider as Left; another 17% rate it as Left of Center. So what businesses in NYC contributed to Business Insider’s “story?”
“Politically, Business Insider leans left through both story selection and wording. Here are some examples of stories that have a leftward tilt…”
No doubt you only rely on those that lean right.
It is hardly surprising that the Trump brand has been damaged. Propaganda works, as has been shown by countless dictatorships.
No fire sale. If it ever comes to that, the sales will be overseen by the courts and the AG, who has a vested interest in maximizing income.
Where I live, they have early voting, and I already cast my ballot for Biden.
Good for you. How many illegals do you have living with you??? Better get ready, because more are coming and YOU are voting for them. Enjoy the fundamental transformation, and enjoy your poverty.
Good for you! Now you can do the other Democrat thing, and vote often! (You schmuck!)
If you die before election day, does your vote still count?