Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

Abandon reality, all ye who enter here. *Democracy*Under*Threat*
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#76

Post by Foggy »

raison de arizona wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 4:06 pm Whoops. Only the best.
That's about the stolen documents case, so I moved it.
Out from under. :thumbsup:
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17657
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#77

Post by raison de arizona »

:bag:
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
humblescribe
Posts: 1091
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:42 pm
Occupation: Dude
Verified:

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#78

Post by humblescribe »

I cannot comment on all the fancy deals that can occur with financial products. That is way above my pay grade. I also cannot comment on how non-traditional lenders operate their lending businesses or if they prepare financial statements.

Loans are assets on the books of the lender. Like any other asset, loans can be sold. (Chances are many of your home mortgages have been sold a time or two during the life of the loan.)

However many times these loans have changed hands, the original note is a contract between lender and borrower, and the terms cannot be changed without mutual consent. Enforcement of the covenants, conditions, and other terms is up to the note holder.

Banks do not like to foreclose on delinquent or defaulted notes. Real estate owned (REO) is a non-productive asset on the books of banks. Banks make money by loaning $100 to someone and collecting $110 over the life of the loan. They do not make money (generally) by having a bunch of REO on their books. They want to convert that REO to cash, so they can loan the cash out and make more money.

Residential REO is easier to dispose. The bank can bundle up all these properties and sell them at a discount to an institutional buyer for resale in the buyer's course of business. The bank gets immediate cash. The buyer makes a tidy profit because he might have paid 80% of the fair market value of the bundled properties.

Commercial real estate of the elk that tfg operates does not have much of a market. Foreclosure on Trump Tower would likely result in the lender having this albatross on its financial statements for years until a suitable buyer comes along. It is worse if Trump Tower is worth $300 million and the loan balance is $400 million. The bank would have to offer this property at a substantial discount to unload it from its books. The bank would have to take a $100 million hit to the bottom line immediately upon foreclosure, and continued hits until it finds a suitable buyer at whatever price the buyer offers. In essence, this sale would be more of a distress sale for the bank.

So, as stated above, the bank(s) will bend over backwards to avoid foreclosure and accommodate the borrower as long as the loan is (mostly) current. When the principal is due, they will kick the can down the road and refinance. Generally, loan fees for this accommodation are payable at least in part up front so the bank can record that income. Loan fees tacked onto the balloon payment would be considered deferred and not recorded as income currently (one of the exceptions to the accrual method, since collection is not certain.)

Borrowers record the funds received as liabilities. Financial statements require disclosures in the footnotes indicating the terms of these loans, current interest rate, principal owed in total and principal owed within one year, and the collateral for each loan.

Since it appears that tfg does not have review or audited statement prepared, no one really knows the extent of the monies owed on real estate loans, and to whom the loans are payable.
"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go." O. Wilde
User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 5502
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
Occupation: We build cars

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#79

Post by Gregg »

Slarti the White wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 2:30 pm
Slim Cognito wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:59 pm Is that how a Ponzi scheme works?
It seems to me (and I'm not a financial guy) that this is a linear scam while a Ponzi scheme is a pyramid. In other words, a Ponzi scheme depends on continually increasing the number of marks paying in so that you can pay off the marks from earlier (minus, of course, what you skim off). In this scam, you only have one lender at a time so (at least for each individual property) there isn't an ever-growing base of "investors" who will be screwed once the supply of new marks drys up. Unless, of course, you use your profits to buy other properties -- like by trying to build a real estate empire -- and keep increasing the size of your debt until (a) you can't find new lenders and go bankrupt (which, of course, has happened to Trump several times); or (b) you find lenders that aren't interested in making money but are very interested in the leverage they have over you.

Apropos of nothing, was it Eric or Donnie Jr. when asked about how they were getting their funding (on a Golf channel interview over a decade ago) said that they could get all of the money they needed from Russia? And why did a Canadian bank controlled by the Saudis pick up Jared Kushner's loan just a bit ago?

My question to Mr. Brolin is: if all of this is right, and Trump's lenders are no longer financial bottom feeders, but rather people who care more about having leverage on, say, someone who controls a large political cult of personality and had a position where he could embed a large number of partisan moles in a large federal government and might have that position once again, what happens when someone -- say a nice New York prosecutor lady -- comes along an drags everything out in the open?

Now I'm "just asking questions" based on speculation here, but if this were true, we might have seen some signs of it in the past. Oh, I don't know, something like someone who was known to be indebted to the Russian oligarchs planted at the highest levels of the Trump campaign so that these creditors could keep an eye on their asset and get insider data that they could use to engineer a massive disinformation campaign to help their pawn achieve high political office -- maybe even the presidency of the United States. *cough* Paul Manifort *cough*. Sorry, something in my throat there...

If this is all true, it would certainly explain why no one is interested in calling their loans -- they don't care about the money, they care about what they purchased with it: Trump. They want him to remain a viable candidate to reclaim the presidency as long as possible and do as much damage as possible to the United States if he is taken down.

But what do I know?
:towel:
In my own honest opinion that is exactly what happened, and the Russians started investing in Trump with the Miss Universe contest (the Pee Tape is real I tell you) and honestly, the fact that he actually became President is the best Perfcecta bet made in the history of parimutuel betting.

Now, it doesn't even matter if they can get him to win again, because he can do plenty of damage pissing on everything win or lose, anyhow. Look at what he has alone done to our elections, it will be generations before more than 80% of the people ever believe who won anything and the 35% who now are essentially nihilists terrorists are the best $10 billion the Russians ever spent, if they all disappeared tomorrow.
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
:dog:

You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 5502
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
Occupation: We build cars

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#80

Post by Gregg »

Mr brolin wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 4:24 pm
Slarti the White wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 1:55 pm
Mr brolin wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 12:08 pm It would not surprise me one iota if a chunk of his loans are interest only payment plans with the principal to be paid on maturity.

He only pays the interest, waits until he's almost at the payment date then refinances it again based on the inflation and Trump inflated value AND does the equivalent of an equity line of credit to draw real valuta out whilst the whole pyramid staggers on until the next principal repayment cycle.

The financial equivalent of a perpetual motion machine as Donny keeps inflating the asset value based on his "feelings" which feeds the lifecycle.

The bottom feeders in finance will keep on feeding this as, to THEM, it's almost risk free. The nominal, imaginary asset valued loan a good margin between the perceived value and the loan value, they make all that lovely lovely money in fees and the like that will be backed loaded into the loan itself.

The next time the loan is maturing the NEW guys ('cause the old ones have all buggered off to the retirement location of choice) will look at the process their predecessors did, dust off the old PowerPoint Decks, rebadge them and do the same AS IT IS THEIR INTEREST TO KEEP THE MAGIC MONEY MACHINE WORKING.
Let me see if I've got this straight -- Trump gets a loan to buy a property (initial terms, down payment, yada yada yada) from someone who puts up actual money to give to the seller. Unlike the loans most of us are familiar with, he only pays interest and fees on this loan -- never paying down the principle. Right before the loan comes due, he finds another lender and, based on a higher valuation, gets a new loan with a different lender who pays off the previous lender (who is now cashed out having made a nice profit on their money over the term of the loan). Trump uses the working income off of the real estate to pay the fees (and support himself) and skims some off of the loan via something like an equity line of credit. As long as you can line up a new lender every time -- who believes in your increased valuation (or doesn't really care) -- then you can keep milking the property in perpetuity and no one really cares about the actual value of the asset -- just that its perceived value lasts long enough for them to cash out.

Is this basically it yes/no?
That is the (relatively) plain vanilla version....... Another variant would be if Donny Boys financial advisors (he is simply too dim to grasp the how) would bundle his various hotel, golf course and sundry assets, into a set of asset backed securities, bundle them into one instrument then split them up into various collateralized debt obligations, offer these Trump branded, solid gold (plated) instruments on a close held sale, have the likes of Moodys give them an AAA rating and slap an "inspection or auditing of these instruments voids warranty" sticker.

Hey it worked for Lehmans and the like
It's a joke but it's only funny because it's true. Not Trump alone, but say you can buy a building for $500,000,000 and it is acutely worth that. the rents it collect support the interest but not an amortizing loan. Most people, oh well, would have been nice but..

Except you might find a lender who will go 5 years interest only with a balloon payment at the end. You take the loan, pay it and refi 5 years, again, interest only.. roll those over a few times and before long the actual principle you owe, the original purchase price, is negligible to the actual value so in say, 20 years you can cash out and make phenomenal amounts of money.

Trump kind of did this with Casinos, except he didn't refi just the purchase price, he refi'd based on the updated value, borrowing more every time and took the new money to be "Donald Trump, Bazillionaire". Even that would have worked, or at least been sustainable, until the real estate values crashed and now when the note comes due and he has to refinance it, he owes 5 times what the place is worth, needs some working capital to run the place in down times and that, kids is how you go bankrupt running a casino.

Except, somewhere in there, he securitized the debt, so it wasn't a loan to a bank but bonds to investors, and he pieced off some equity and put that in his pocket and now that other people paid the bills he charged 'himself' a licensing fee for his own name and when he bankrupted a casino virtually everyone who had ever walked past the place, from the unpaid contractors that built it too the bondholders who bought the debt to the shareholders who bought equity, all lost money. But Trump made money six ways from Tuesday. The more you understand how crooked of a businessman he is and always has been, and the more you realize that most of the crooked shit he has done is more unethical than actually illegal, makes you want to hit him in the face with a brick. This before he ever thought of running for President and phucking up Western Civilization.

:torches: :mad2: :argument: :smokeears: :torches:
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
:dog:

You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
User avatar
keith
Posts: 3706
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:23 pm
Location: The Swamp in Victorian Oz
Occupation: Retired Computer Systems Analyst Project Manager Super Coder
Verified: ✅lunatic

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#81

Post by keith »

My ol' pappy used to say "If you owe $100 to the bank, its your problem. If you owe 100 million to the bank, its their problem.
Has everybody heard about the bird?
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17657
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#82

Post by raison de arizona »

Image
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am
Location: Maybelot
Verified: ✅✅

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#83

Post by Maybenaut »

What I have never understood about any of this is how Trump, et al, could have defrauded a modern lending institution. I get that the information you have to put on your documents has to be true. But how could he have inflated the valuation of his property without the lender being complicit? Doesn’t the lender have a duty to its shareholders to check the accuracy of the information it gets from the borrower?

I had to jump through a bunch of hoops to borrow against property I owned outright. I had to prove its valuation by using an appraiser that the lender selected. I had to prove that it was insured for full re-construction value if the place burned to the ground. In other words, *I* didn’t decide what the place was worth, the lender did.

This is just weird to me.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
tek
Posts: 2250
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:15 am

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#84

Post by tek »

Maybenaut wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2022 5:22 pmThis is just weird to me.
You aren't rich.
That's a different game.
User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 5502
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
Occupation: We build cars

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#85

Post by Gregg »

Maybenaut wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2022 5:22 pm What I have never understood about any of this is how Trump, et al, could have defrauded a modern lending institution. I get that the information you have to put on your documents has to be true. But how could he have inflated the valuation of his property without the lender being complicit? Doesn’t the lender have a duty to its shareholders to check the accuracy of the information it gets from the borrower?

I had to jump through a bunch of hoops to borrow against property I owned outright. I had to prove its valuation by using an appraiser that the lender selected. I had to prove that it was insured for full re-construction value if the place burned to the ground. In other words, *I* didn’t decide what the place was worth, the lender did.

This is just weird to me.
The normal banks all cut him off, the normal side of the bent banks even cut him off. It was the bent branch of the bent bank that loaned him the money and y9ou can choose your own idea for their motivation.

They could have been playing the "take it for a term collect the interest and make him figure something out later" that we talked about above. They could have been the middlemen in a money laundering scheme where Trump paid them back in kind, one way or another. They could have been letting him have enough rope to be able to control him when he couldn't pay,.

That last one even has different ways, maybe Putin is the background money supply and he played the long game and won big. Maybe it was someone who made him sign a personal gaurentee and wanted to eventually rob him blind of something, Trump Tower, a golf course or 10, his interest in the building in SF that he made at one time most of his actual profit from (it was a minority interest and has nothing to do with the management BTW)

Who knows. But sure as shooting, DB knew who they were dealing with, knew he was lying and didn't really care. They figured they were gonna get their fees and if someone got screwed later on, it wasn't likely to be them.
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
:dog:

You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
Mr brolin
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:59 pm
Occupation: Chief Blame Officer
Verified: ✅ as vaguely humanoid

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#86

Post by Mr brolin »

If you want a view into how The Fecking Grifter gets away with this, a long but useful write up on ONE of his failed ventures

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/27/busi ... taxes.html
New Turtle
Posts: 585
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2021 2:43 pm

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#87

Post by New Turtle »

He told Hannity he puts a disclaimer on his valuations, like 1.5 pages worth of tremendous words that say they need to bring their own people to check for themselves. But it's not a big deal because his debt is tremendously small, like so small it barely exists because he has so much cash he always pays the banks back.
User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 1833
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:19 pm

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#88

Post by Sam the Centipede »

Or did he just make a disclaimer by thinking about it?

Is disclaiming more difficult than declassifying?
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14356
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#89

Post by RTH10260 »

I believe disclaimers have a limit, eg bad will, malfaisance, criminal desception, is not covered when it comes down to the nittygritty details.
User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 5502
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
Occupation: We build cars

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#90

Post by Gregg »

New Turtle wrote: Sun Sep 25, 2022 6:56 am He told Hannity he puts a disclaimer on his valuations, like 1.5 pages worth of tremendous words that say they need to bring their own people to check for themselves. But it's not a big deal because his debt is tremendously small, like so small it barely exists because he has so much cash he always pays the banks back.
"Okay, I lied to the banks, but it's the bank's fault, not mine"
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
:dog:

You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9554
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#91

Post by Foggy »

"I don't take responsibility at all." - 45th president of the United States of America
Out from under. :thumbsup:
User avatar
Phoenix520
Posts: 4149
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:20 pm
Verified:

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#92

Post by Phoenix520 »

Somewhere in the back of my brain, among all the ringing bullshit he’s proclaimed over the eons, is him trumpsplaining that high end real estate deals are too complicated for anyone but him to understand. There are considerations and valuations that don’t exist in residential. IOW, it’s complicated. (Patpat on the head) Don’t worry your pretty little head about it.
woodworker
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:58 am
Location: San Mateo, Calif
Occupation: Slave to my cats

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#93

Post by woodworker »

Greatgrey wrote: Wed Sep 21, 2022 12:48 pm The Trumps knew this was coming, they tried to settle last week. I wanna know how much they offered.

B0B28108-2FCB-44BC-AB45-D1C424FFE9D9.jpeg

Plus also too, Jared isn’t named.
They did the Michael Corleone offer, essentially nothing. Actually, I suspect that they offered the standard consent degree, i.e., no acceptance of liability or responsibility, pay a nominal amount and promise never to do in the future any of these bad things they deny doing anyhow. And why shouldn't they expect that it would be accepted -- that is what Fred and Don have done for the last 50 years and gotten away with it.
woodworker
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:58 am
Location: San Mateo, Calif
Occupation: Slave to my cats

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#94

Post by woodworker »

noblepa wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 10:52 am
realist wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 10:34 am
Foggy wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 7:46 am So WHY have all the banks that have outstanding loans to Trump or the Trump Organization not called in those loans, after it has been credibly alleged that the loans are based on phony valuation of the collateral? :think:

Those loans aren't improving. Who's going to be last to pull any money out of the crumbling edifice?
If the repayment terms of the loans are being met, why would they? Get all they can while they can.
If they lose faith in his ability or willingness to EVER repay the principle of those loans, and if the assets behind them are worth far less than Trump claimed they were, some of the lenders may want to call their loans sooner, rather than later, even if Trump is making the contractually required minimum payments. They may wish to get THEIR money back while he still has enough to pay THEM and to hell with the other creditors. If they wait until he actually defaults, there may not be enough value in the assets or money in Trump's bank accounts to pay more than a fraction or what they are owed.

IANAL, but it is my understanding that, absent a bankruptcy filing, creditors are paid on a first-to-file basis. That is, the first to file a lawsuit gets paid the entire amount owed. By the time you get to the last creditor, there probably isn't anything left, so they get nothing.

OTOH, once a bankruptcy is filed, every creditor is on an equal footing. The debtor's total assets are divided up on a pro-rated basis to pay all the creditors the same fraction of what they are owed.

IOW, without bankruptcy, the first creditor to sue gets 100% of what they are owed, while the last to file may get nothing. With a bankruptcy filing, all the creditors may get 10%, 20% or whatever assets the debtor has.
Just to pick on you a little, you got the part right about IANAL, but the rest generally no. I spent 20+ years doing big-firm law in Los Angeles, a significant portion of which was finance, representing both borrowers and lenders.

I am fairly certain that most, if not all, of the Trump/Trump Org loans are secured loans, e.g., collateralized with real property, cash accounts, etc., and that said loans have financial and other covenants imposing certain obligations on Trump et al. For example, a financial covenant might be to maintain a certain debt to net asset ratio and if the actual ratio falls below that agreed upon threshold, there is a default. A non-financial covenant might be to provide regular financial statements, prepared in accordance with an agreed upon standard, to the lender. Failure to do so creates a default. And generally, if an auditor withdraws their financial reports, that is a default. An indictment/conviction of the company or of an executive office may trigger a default. Major loan agreements have many many pages covering representations, warranties, affirmative and negative covenants/pledges and events of default.

Now, if there are multiple lenders, there may be an intercreditor agreement setting forth all the various competing rights between the various lenders. Generally, the initial major/senior lender's loan agreement provides that the borrower cannot incur any material debt that could possibly jeopardize the senior lender's position and if the borrower wants the senior lender to agree to the borrower borrowing more money, the senior lender insists that all the new junior lenders enter into an intercreditor agreement acknowledging the primacy of the senior lender and that the junior lenders cannot take certain actions to protect themselves without the consent of the senior.

There is a whole lot more to discuss, coming up in more posts later today -- if I have not been ninjaed.
User avatar
raison de arizona
Posts: 17657
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:21 am
Location: Nothing, Arizona
Occupation: bit twiddler
Verified: ✔️ he/him/his

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#95

Post by raison de arizona »

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 5502
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
Occupation: We build cars

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#96

Post by Gregg »

Trump accused someone of Judge Shopping?

What's next, is he gonna make fun of someone's hair? :faint:
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
:dog:

You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
User avatar
Ben-Prime
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:29 pm
Location: Worldwide Availability
Occupation: Managing People Who Manage Machines
Verified: ✅MamaSaysI'mBonaFide

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#97

Post by Ben-Prime »

Gregg wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 12:30 pm Trump accused someone of Judge Shopping?

What's next, is he gonna make fun of someone's hair? :faint:
And call that person fat, corrupt, and stupid.
But the sunshine aye shall light the sky,
As round and round we run;
And the truth shall ever come uppermost,
And justice shall be done.

- Charles Mackay, "Eternal Justice"
User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 5832
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:25 pm

Re: State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#98

Post by Suranis »

Gregg wrote: Thu Sep 29, 2022 12:30 pm Trump accused someone of Judge Shopping?

What's next, is he gonna make fun of someone's hair? :faint:
He's made fun of other peoples hair quite often. Gets people talking about him.
Hic sunt dracones
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10497
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#99

Post by Kendra »

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... A12Offu|12
It's been nearly three weeks since New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a massive fraud lawsuit against Donald Trump and his family business, and already her office is accusing the former president of "gamesmanship" — for allegedly dodging formal service of the suit.

As of Friday, nearly all of the lawsuit's 16 named defendants had formally accepted service of the 220-page lawsuit, according to the AG's latest court filing in the case.

But two defendants remained unserved, the filing shows — Donald Trump and his son Eric Trump, who has been most hands-on in running the Trump Organization since his father won the 2016 election.
chancery
Posts: 1315
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:24 pm
Verified:

State of New York vs Trump, et al - the civil fraud case against the Trump Organization

#100

Post by chancery »

This is baloney on the part of the AG and poor reporting on the part of the Business Insider. According to the docket, counsel representing Donald Trump entered appearances on September 28.

As for "gamesmanship," while it's undoubtedly correct that Trump's side will do everything possible to delay the case, there's nothing inappropriate about counsel for a defendant insisting that the plaintiff carry out its obligation to serve her client. It might be pointless, and it might reflect poor judgement (although it's not a big deal), but it's not inappropriate. And the AG should have sent out its process servers immediately once Trump's counsel failed to respond to the email.

Dunno about Eric, but his absence won't hold things up.

None of this matters. :yawn:
Post Reply

Return to “The Big Lie & Aftermath of The Former Guy”