Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

Cairn Horn88

By Cairn Horn88
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 28.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

HillCountryBevo
HillCountryBevo

Imagine your basis of hating Trump is because of mean tweets, January 6 and “hush money” trial all because liberal media is crooked. Fuck right off. This is my last post in this forum  dumb fucki

Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand

When you're a court, you just grab their asset, and they let you do it!

HillCountryBevo
HillCountryBevo

Bye bitch. Enjoy living in literal hell if your man Biden is re elected

Posted Images

TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31184

Posted
Posted

Haha the failure to request a jury trial saga continues, and Engoron weighs in.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-lawyer-victory-judge-fraud-trial-1833941

Engoron raises a decent point.  According to NY practice, even when you do request a jury trial, you have to be pretty specific about which issues you want a jury trial on and why they are triable to a jury.  Engoron casually notes that all of the relief sought by James was equitable in nature, which might have foreclosed a jury trial.

But the point still remains that Trumpco never raised the issue.  And they may have been able to delay things by appealing any adverse ruling.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Superhero

Superhero 8739

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Back to GA, Fani Willis puts the beatdown on Gym Jordan (who's investigating whether Federal funds are used to prosecute dotard)

 

Quote

CNN — Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis declined to provide House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan with any additional information about her investigation of former President Donald Trump and his allies as well as any interactions with the Justice Department, according to a new letter obtained by CNN.

“A charitable explanation of your correspondence is that you are ignorant of the United States and Georgia Constitutions and codes,” Willis wrote in her letter to Jordan, an Ohio Republican, Wednesday.“A more troubling explanation is that you are abusing your authority as Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary to attempt to obstruct and interfere with a Georgia criminal prosecution,” she added.

Willis previously provided information about the federal funding her office receives. But she has rebuffed Jordan’s demands for information related to her investigation and copies of any communication between the district attorney’s office and federal executive branch officials, particularly anyone at the Justice Department.

“To the extent you have specific questions about the Department of Justice’s communications, we refer you to the Department of Justice,” Willis wrote in the letter.

The House Judiciary Committee opened an investigation into the Fulton County district attorney’s office in August and has focused on their interactions with the Justice Department and any use of federal funds in its probe.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/11/politics/fani-willis-jim-jordan/index.html

  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21743

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Haha the failure to request a jury trial saga continues, and Engoron weighs in.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-lawyer-victory-judge-fraud-trial-1833941

Engoron raises a decent point.  According to NY practice, even when you do request a jury trial, you have to be pretty specific about which issues you want a jury trial on and why they are triable to a jury.  Engoron casually notes that all of the relief sought by James was equitable in nature, which might have foreclosed a jury trial.

But the point still remains that Trumpco never raised the issue.  And they may have been able to delay things by appealing any adverse ruling.

Just saw that today. Hadn't even thought that far through it, but he was never entitled to a jury. Might also explain why summary judgment was entered. The facts, which juries usually determine, appear undisputed, the question is whether they constitute a violation of the law, which the judge determines. 

 

NY Trump Judge Says A Jury Trial Was Never On The Table

By Stewart Bishop ·  Listen to article

Law360, New York (October 11, 2023, 9:59 PM EDT) -- A Manhattan judge on Wednesday sought to put to rest widespread speculation about the lack of a jury in the civil fraud trial of Donald Trump over the New York attorney general's claims that the former president falsely inflated his net worth by billions of dollars, saying a trial by jury was never in the cards.

New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron made the remarks before trial testimony commenced in the wake of repeated complaints by Trump about the case proceeding as a bench trial and amid speculation that his attorneys "forgot to check a box."

"We're having a non-jury trial because this is a non-jury case," Justice Engoron said.

The judge said New York Attorney General Letitia James' office clearly sought a non-jury trial, and there was no defense motion for jurors to decide the claims against Trump, his adult sons, several of his businesses and two former Trump Organization executives. Even if the defense had so moved, Justice Engoron said it wouldn't have made a difference.

The judge said his research showed "it would not have helped to make a motion" because the relief requested — including the $250 million in disgorgement the attorney general is seeking and taking action against Trump's businesses — was equitable in nature and did not require a jury.

"No one forgot to check a box," Justice Engoron said.

The judge's clarification came on the seventh day of trial over the attorney general's claims that Trump's so-called statements of financial condition wildly overvalued the former president's real estate holdings, which he used to secure better deals on bank loans and insurance policies.

Justice Engoron in a pretrial summary judgment ruling already found Trump and his co-defendants liable for fraud, and the trial is going forward on James' remaining claims for false business records, false financial statements, insurance fraud and conspiracy.

The judge also effectively ordered Trump Organization LLCs dissolved as he immediately "canceled" all New York business certificates held by Trump, his sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, and their long-serving financial officers Jeffrey McConney and Allen Weisselberg, and directed that a receiver be appointed to manage the dissolution. That order has been temporarily stayed while Trump appeals.

The court on Wednesday heard testimony from a former risk manager for Deutsche Bank's private clients who said the bank relied on the presumed accuracy of Donald Trump's financial statements when it decided to lend him hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of several years, statements which the New York attorney general says falsely inflated his wealth by billions of dollars.

Nicholas Haigh was responsible for approving multiple loans to Trump and his businesses and testified that in making such determinations, his department gathered information on the client, including a statement of financial condition, to generate "a risk score that calculated a probability of default for that borrower."

He stated that along with real estate collateral, Trump's personal guarantee of the loans was essential, as were covenants that included a net worth requirement of $2.5 billion. James' office contends Trump's net worth was never that high in 2011 to 2021, the time period at issue in the case.

Haigh testified about a $125 million loan the bank extended to Trump in or around 2011 that was backed by his National Doral Golf Club in Florida and a full and unconditional guarantee by the former president.

"That was not a typical type of collateral," Haigh said. "Golf resorts are relatively uncommon compared to other types of commercial real estate and the number of buyers ... are limited."

Deutsche Bank was by far the biggest lender to the Trump Organization. As of May 2022, the Trump Organization owed the bank approximately $340 million in principal and was spending tens of millions of dollars every year to service the debt, according to the attorney general.

Between 2011 and 2021, the attorney general says Trump overstated his net worth by anywhere between $1.9 billion and $3.6 billion, but Haigh said he believed Trump's statements of financial condition were legitimate.

"I assumed that the representations of value of assets and liabilities were broadly accurate," he said.
 
Haigh is slated to continue his testimony Thursday. Thus far, the court has also heard from two Mazars LLP accountants who helped compile Trump's financial statements, ex-controller McConney, and former chief financial officer Weisselberg, who is due to continue his testimony after Haigh wraps up. 

The government is represented by Kevin Wallace, Andrew Amer, Colleen Faherty, Alex Finkelstein, Wil Handley, Eric Haren, Louis Solomon, Sherief Gaber, Mark Ladov and Stephanie Torre of the New York State Office of the Attorney General.

Trump and the Trump Organization are represented by Alina Habba and Michael Madaio of Habba Madaio & Associates LLP, Christopher Kise, Jesus Suarez and Lazaro Fields of Continental PLLC and Armen Morian of Morian Law PLLC.

Weisselberg and McConney are represented by Habba Madaio & Associates LLP.

Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are represented by Clifford Robert and Michael Farina of Robert & Robert PLLC.

The case is People of the State of New York v. Donald Trump et al., case number 452564/2022, in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York.

--Additional reporting by Frank G. Runyeon. Editing by Janice Carter Brown.
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19449

Posted
Posted

I have seen every kind of bullshit vanity business "award" or plackard or deskpiece or paperweight.  I've had to make up so many fucking stupid ones to stroke the ego of so many shitbags we've done business with.  But I was today year's old when I saw somebody post a photograph of "Trophy for Most Perfect CRE Loan", and it was a fucking U.S. President.  

I mean, this takes "Participation Trophy" to whole other level.  I hope his snowflake legions understand what this means.  He literally got a trophy for participating in paying back a loan he took out in the first place.  It's one step away from giving somebody a Matchbox Car model of the car they're currently making payments on at your dealership.  It's that ridiculous.  But of course, in MAGA fashion, a dozen stupids will get that same trophy tattoo'd on themselves before the month is out.  "Hey, make sure you get the number of windows correct!"  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 47809

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Now we are into trophies and perfect loans:

 

Screenshot2023-10-12124902.thumb.png.bdcefd2531566b53a55a66f7e3144e11.png

Ah yes, the always above reproach Deutsche Bank, which has never been invoved directly in the US Financial Crisis, which has literally be fined for doing business with US Sanctioned countries, LITERAL FUCKING ESPIONAGE, Russian Money laundering, Bribery, the Libor Scandal...

THE BEST LOAN OFFICERS. SMARTEST LAWYERS. What are their fines up to at this point, 10 billion? 20?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19449

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, texasdago said:

Waiting for him to post his high school ROTC wrestling trophy to show he's healthy and willing to go the mat to fight Joe Biden.

What are the worst trophies in the history of sport?

I knew a couple in Miami Beach that had that same sculpture used as a design for their soup bowls at formal dinners.  

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19449

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

Here's a better pic

 

9661eccb05eb20ca.jpg

 

Your honor, there's no written proof that my client overvalued the asset for leverage purposes or to mislead/misguide the capital stack partners on the property deal.  

"Counselor, I'm looking right at the written proof of $170,000,000.  That's not what the comps or tax rolls or FMV data suggest."

Your honor, as I said...there's no written proof.  What you're looking at is not in print, it's 'Etched.'  A PERFECT ETCH!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dutchrudder

Dutchrudder 11103

Posted
Posted

Maybe this was already discussed somewhere, but is the defense really going to involve the subtle difference between  "'support' the Constitution" and "'preserve, protect and defend' the Constitution".  Maybe we can get the court to define the definition of "is" again...

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Five

Red Five 40593

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, kevwun said:

That's called the "Our client is fucked." defense.  One of the definitions of support is to uphold or defend as valid or right.

How would one defend the Constitution without also supporting it? "Well I don't like it, but I swore an oath dammit, so I'm gonna defend it anyway!". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104465

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Now we are into trophies and perfect loans:

 

Screenshot2023-10-12124902.thumb.png.bdcefd2531566b53a55a66f7e3144e11.png

 

1 hour ago, YGIFS said:

I have seen every kind of bullshit vanity business "award" or plackard or deskpiece or paperweight.  I've had to make up so many fucking stupid ones to stroke the ego of so many shitbags we've done business with.  But I was today year's old when I saw somebody post a photograph of "Trophy for Most Perfect CRE Loan", and it was a fucking U.S. President.  

I mean, this takes "Participation Trophy" to whole other level.  I hope his snowflake legions understand what this means.  He literally got a trophy for participating in paying back a loan he took out in the first place.  It's one step away from giving somebody a Matchbox Car model of the car they're currently making payments on at your dealership.  It's that ridiculous.  But of course, in MAGA fashion, a dozen stupids will get that same trophy tattoo'd on themselves before the month is out.  "Hey, make sure you get the number of windows correct!"  

 

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:


Does that trophy say “Trump Old Post Office LLC”?

It looks like the trophy has the loan amount and the date it was issued:  July 23, 2014. 
 

That's because it's not a fucking "trophy."  It's a "tombstone."  They aren't "awarded," or any shit like that.  They are printed to memorialize a thing that happened (so, in that respect, they aren't any different than the t-shirt the local Delta Upsilon Mu fellas printed up to memorialize their "Tits for Tots!" stripper fundraiser party) -- in this case, they are printed to memorialize the closing of a deal.  It's routine:

Quote

Although many believe that deal toys are more fun and creative than a traditional financial tombstone, the terms are used almost always interchangeably. These plaques and other types of trophies are typically used in finance and property deals and are usually presented at a closing ceremony or dinner.

Exhibit # eleventy billion in how he's the dumbest motherfucker ever supported by the dumbest motherfuckers ever.  If you vote for Trump, you are among the dumbest people who ever lived, and I am including in that assessment all prior members of the entire genus Homo, including that dumb short bitch Lucy.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14388

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, YGIFS said:

I knew a couple in Miami Beach that had that same sculpture used as a design for their soup bowls at formal dinners.  

Per chance did they have a butler named Agador Spartacus?

 

/jou bad mane

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcbc

dcbc 14388

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Uh, I am apparently missing a shit-ton of trophies.  I demand redress!

Not in direct response, but it reminds me of a  friend who proudly displayed her "Worst Bowler Trophy" with scorecard in her office.  It's okay to display that shit ironically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 25865

Posted
Posted

Allen Weisselberg, the longtime chief financial officer of the Trump Organization, lied in sworn testimony on Tuesday when questioned about Donald Trump’s penthouse atop Trump Tower.

 

Weisselberg was on the stand as part of a $250 million lawsuit that the New York attorney general is waging against Trump and his associates, including Weisselberg, accusing them of lying about Trump’s net worth to financial institutions. To arrive at inflated figures, the Trump Organization used demonstrably incorrect facts, such as valuing Trump’s penthouse as if it contained 30,000 square feet, when it in fact consisted of 10,996.

 

Under questioning, Weisselberg acknowledged that the 30,000-square-foot figure was wrong. He tried to suggest, however, that he had little to do with the bogus calculation, batting away a series of questions about the financial documents and discussions with Forbes, which has been valuing Trump’s fortune since 1982. “I never focused on the triplex, to be honest with you,” Weisselberg said. “It was almost de minimis relative to his net worth, so I really didn’t focus on it.”

 

He repeated similar lines as his testimony continued. “I never focused on the apartment Mr. Trump owned,” he said at one point. At another: “I didn’t correlate the square footage of Donald’s apartment. I never focused on it. It was always in my mind a de minimis asset of the overall of Donald J. Trump’s statement of financial condition. That was never a concern of mine. I never even thought about the apartment. It was de minimis in my mind.”

 

But that’s not true. A review of old emails and notes, some of which the attorney general’s office does not possess, show that Weisselberg absolutely thought about Trump’s apartment—and played a key role in trying to convince Forbes over the course of several years that it was worth more than it really was. Given the fact that these discussions continued for years, and that Weisselberg took a very detailed approach in reviewing Trump’s assets with Forbes, it defies all logic to think he truly believes what he is now saying in court.

 

The saga started in 2009, on a relatively friendly note. Forbes had been valuing Trump’s fortune for decades at that point, though some of his smaller assets remained absent from the overall calculation. Weisselberg and Trump summoned a Forbes reporter to a meeting, according to the reporter’s notes. The reporter was hesitant to add Trump’s personal home to the valuation, something Trump and his underlings seemed to be okay with at the time. “They understand if we don’t want to include the penthouse at Trump Tower,” the reporter noted.

Three years later, in 2012, a different reporter wrote, “Allen asked why we count large private estates for other billionaires and not Trump. He said we should be including his NY penthouse. He thinks it’s worth more [than] $88m.” Weisselberg had a point. The penthouse wasn’t worth $88 million, but it was worth something. The reporter added it to the calculation with an estimated $64 million valuation.

Weisselberg kept pushing. The next year, a reporter explained, “Now Allen says it’s worth $200M, and there’s no debt.” Believing the penthouse was nearly 30,000 square feet, the figure that the Trump Organization would eventually claim on its internal documents, the reporter decided to bump up the estimate to $90 million.

A year later, in 2014, Weisselberg once again weighed in on the value. “Now Allen says it’s $163m with 0 debt,” a reporter wrote in her notes. “He is sending us sales records for One57”—a luxury apartment building nearby, which Trump’s financial statements also referenced—“and then applying a per-square-foot rate, based on 30k sf.”

The reporter opted to leave the valuation at $90 million in her calculation and sent a summary of her estimates to Weisselberg and his deputy, Jeff McConney. Weisselberg then set up a phone call, which was followed by an email exchange, titled “Mr. Trump’s penthouse.” “Hi Jeff, Allen— I just wanted to let you know that I was not able to bump up the value of Mr. Trump’s penthouse this time. While I understand your point that it may indeed sell for more than $90 million due to its large square footage, this is still an untested market. Since no apartment in New York is known to have sold for more than that sum to date, we’re not comfortable upping the number at this time.” Weisselberg replied at 5:02 p.m. on a September Friday, delving into the weeds on the penthouse. “Thank you for the response, but keep in mind that his apartment is a triplex which consists of 6 apartments.”

In 2015, Trump hosted three Forbes journalists inside Trump Tower, with Weisselberg by his side. “This is the entire floor of Trump Tower, just so you know,” Trump said, showing off his penthouse. “Now, this wraps all around the building. All around the elevators. And I have three times three. So there’s like 11,000 feet on a floor. So I have three. So 33,000—and I have the roof.”

The next year, Forbes uncovered property records that showed that the penthouse was only 10,996 square feet, not 30,000 square feet or 33,000 square feet. Reporters reached out to Weisselberg and others at the Trump Organization to ask about the discrepancy, emails that are now being used as evidence in the case.

Even after receiving those messages, the Trump Organization apparently continued to value the penthouse on its documents as if it had 30,000 square feet. It wasn’t until after Forbes published a story in May 2017, exposing the lie publicly, that the Trump Organization seemed to change its internal documents, reducing the square footage to 10,996.

Weisselberg was demoted from his role as CFO after he was criminally charged in a separate tax case in 2021. He remained with the Trump Organization until January, when he was sentenced to five months in jail as the result of the other case, which also implicated the Trump Organization. Weisselberg signed a separation agreement with the firm that month, which promises to pay him $2 million over two years, if he complies with his obligations under the agreement.

An attorney for Weisselberg did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Weisselberg is expected to retake the stand in the attorney general’s case to continue his testimony in the coming days.

 

 
Follow me on Twitter or LinkedIn. Check out some of my other work here. Send me a secure tip. 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31184

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Dutchrudder said:

Maybe this was already discussed somewhere, but is the defense really going to involve the subtle difference between  "'support' the Constitution" and "'preserve, protect and defend' the Constitution".  Maybe we can get the court to define the definition of "is" again...

 

 

Here's why that's not quite as shitty an argument as it sounds like.  The relevant wording of the 14th Amendment is:

who, having previously taken an oath, as [a member of Congress]1, or as an officer of the United States, or as [a member of any State legislature]2, or as [an executive or judicial officer of any State]3, to support the Constitution of the United States,  . . .

The President is clearly not 1, 2, or 3, so the question is, is he an "officer of the United States"?  And the answer to that is not as clear as it might seem.  In fact, it's an unanswered question as to whether the removal statute applies to Trump or not.  And one that comes up with some frequency.

We have a hierarchy of federal (and state for that matter) officials:

  • Elected officials
  • Officials  appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate (these almost always are "officers")
  • Inferior officers (those appointed by POTUS or others and not confirmed)
  • Employees

So, many times, you have to answer to which of the above does the statute/law/amendment apply when it uses a dumbass term like "officers" instead of "elected and appointed officials and employees of state or federal government" (or "waters of the United States," fucking Congress).

And, the Constitution specifies the oath of office of the President as "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution.  It does not set out the oaths for Reps or Senators but does say "support" the Constitution.

I don't know enough constitutional history to know if that was an intended difference in the original document, but suspect it might have been.

So, the "support" vs. "preserve, protect, defend," which is unique to the presidential oath is perhaps a clue that the drafters of the 14th did not intend "officers" to include the President.

Or, they were just drunk and stupid as shit and not paying attention to what they were doing.  The 14th Amendment rivals the Second in lack of clarity and linguistic WHAT THE FUCK?  

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DigglerontheHoof

DigglerontheHoof 21022

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Here's why that's not quite as shitty an argument as it sounds like.  The relevant wording of the 14th Amendment is:

who, having previously taken an oath, as [a member of Congress]1, or as an officer of the United States, or as [a member of any State legislature]2, or as [an executive or judicial officer of any State]3, to support the Constitution of the United States,  . . .

The President is clearly not 1, 2, or 3, so the question is, is he an "officer of the United States"?  And the answer to that is not as clear as it might seem.  In fact, it's an unanswered question as to whether the removal statute applies to Trump or not.  And one that comes up with some frequency.

We have a hierarchy of federal (and state for that matter) officials:

  • Elected officials
  • Officials  appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate (these almost always are "officers")
  • Inferior officers (those appointed by POTUS or others and not confirmed)
  • Employees

So, many times, you have to answer to which of the above does the statute/law/amendment apply when it uses a dumbass term like "officers" instead of "elected and appointed officials and employees of state or federal government" (or "waters of the United States," fucking Congress).

And, the Constitution specifies the oath of office of the President as "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution.  It does not set out the oaths for Reps or Senators but does say "support" the Constitution.

I don't know enough constitutional history to know if that was an intended difference in the original document, but suspect it might have been.

So, the "support" vs. "preserve, protect, defend," which is unique to the presidential oath is perhaps a clue that the drafters of the 14th did not intend "officers" to include the President.

Or, they were just drunk and stupid as shit and not paying attention to what they were doing.  The 14th Amendment rivals the Second in lack of clarity and linguistic WHAT THE FUCK?  

 

Oh, Jesus Titty Fucking Christ

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...