JessicaRabbit:


I appreciate your clarification about valuing assets, and I agree that a holistic approach is necessary. However, the New York Attorney General's case goes beyond brick and mortar. It alleges misrepresentation of property values to obtain loans and tax benefits. Whether the Trump brand has value isn't the question. It's whether that value was accurately represented.

Additionally, while some may see the Letitia James case as political, it's important to remember that violations of financial law are not partisan issues. The justice system should hold everyone accountable, regardless of their political affiliation.

As for the jury, they're instructed to base their verdict on evidence, not public opinion. The "ham sandwich" saying is a reminder of their power, not a justification for ignoring facts.

basilico:
Jessicarabbit.
Fani Willis woes keep on growing Judge rules there will be an evidentiary hearing ( in 2 days?) .

BREAKING: Judge in Trump Case in Georgia on Fani Willis: “I think it's possible that the facts alleged could result in disqualification. I think an evidentiary hearing must occur to establish the record on those core allegations”

NB: She will give testimony under oath. How will she explain why she filed court documents saying her affair with Nathan Wade started after she appointed him, while his business partner is willing to testify in person that the affair started much earlier?
She also tainted the jury pool by claiming the accuser was going after her and Wade because they are black leaving out the other two white special prosecutors.

LOL. Donald Trump plans to attend the hearing. Master troll..That black who conspired to have mugshots of those who took action to expose the steal in Georgia.
Georgia's was a state case. The president cannot issue a pardon for state level case. Was to be the fail safe Incase federal level cases got thrown out.
All the same it will be such a nice mugshot of Fani Willis. She has brokem some law I believe that deserves an indictment and jail sentence.
There is a little mentioned filing at the Supreme Court questioning the legality of private citizen named Jack Smith as a Special Counsel wielding Super Cow powers; more than the Presidential nominated US Attorneys who have passed confirmation from the Senate.

JessicaRabbit:


Same old, same old.

Misinformation, bias and hateful insults... that's pretty much all there is to your debating prowess.

I'll debunk this watery rant when I'm more lucid. At this present moment, I don't have much patience for wanton ignorance.

basilico:


Granted. The jury delivers it's verdict strictly based on the judges direction. The judge sets the evidence they will review, can block jurors from reviewing exculpatory evidence, can block defence presenting evidence .

Here is a democrat's take on Letitia James.

Dershowitz called for New York State Attorney General Letitia James to be brought up before the bar.

“I didn’t make it up,” Dershowitz replied. “I wish I were creative and original, but I got it from obviously Letitia James campaign. She ought to be brought up before the bar. You should not have an elected prosecutor campaigning on the promise to get a particular defendant. Now if she didn’t get him. She would lose the election. This is a variation of Stalin and Beria back in the 1930s when the head of the KGB says to Stalin, show me the man, I’ll find you the crime. This is — show me the man, we know who it is. She told us who it was, Donald Trump, and we’ll find you the fraud even though there was no harm.”

“Generally in our legal system, particularly under the system of equity when you go get a jury trial, if it’s no harm, no foul, no harm, no fine, but when you have no damages at all, usually you can do a multiple,” he continued. “Say there’s a million dollars of damages, you can give $3 million fine. But when you have zero damages, no matter how many times you multiply it, zero plus and nth times whatever, is all still zero. So it it’s outrageous. Now, I don’t know whether it’s going to be reversed in the appellate division


Oh and you might want to acknowledge that Letitia valued Mar a Lago at the same price as 77000 pairs of $349 shoes that Trump is selling
Food for thought. Brand

basilico:


You can never debunk what I put down.
I always state whether it's my opinion.
I have never been proven wrong.
To prove me wrong, you have to provide proof to the contrary.

JessicaRabbit:


Challenge accepted! But first, pass the salt, because your confidence is seasoning my popcorn.

JessicaRabbit:


Challenge accepted! But first, pass the salt, because your confidence is seasoning my popcorn.

basilico:


Find a shred of any lie I put down here. Was once active circa 2013-15 with this moniker on the Islam section if you want to interogate my history here and I have no shame about it.

basilico:


Granted. The jury delivers it's verdict strictly based on the judges direction. The judge sets the evidence they will review, can block jurors from reviewing exculpatory evidence, can block defence presenting evidence .

Here is a democrat's take on Letitia James.

Dershowitz called for New York State Attorney General Letitia James to be brought up before the bar.

“I didn’t make it up,” Dershowitz replied. “I wish I were creative and original, but I got it from obviously Letitia James campaign. She ought to be brought up before the bar. You should not have an elected prosecutor campaigning on the promise to get a particular defendant. Now if she didn’t get him. She would lose the election. This is a variation of Stalin and Beria back in the 1930s when the head of the KGB says to Stalin, show me the man, I’ll find you the crime. This is — show me the man, we know who it is. She told us who it was, Donald Trump, and we’ll find you the fraud even though there was no harm.”

“Generally in our legal system, particularly under the system of equity when you go get a jury trial, if it’s no harm, no foul, no harm, no fine, but when you have no damages at all, usually you can do a multiple,” he continued. “Say there’s a million dollars of damages, you can give $3 million fine. But when you have zero damages, no matter how many times you multiply it, zero plus and nth times whatever, is all still zero. So it it’s outrageous. Now, I don’t know whether it’s going to be reversed in the appellate division


Oh and you might want to acknowledge that Letitia valued Mar a Lago at the same price as 77000 pairs of $349 shoes that Trump is selling
Food for thought. Brand

Obrigardo:


President Biden will beat the Criminal trump like a marching band drum and it will be so lovely to see 😁😂😂

JessicaRabbit:

(1) Dershowitz is not a credible source of legal or political analysis, sorry. He's a notorious contrarian who likes to stir up controversy and defend the indefensible, like the impeachments of Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, or the idea that 15-year-olds should be able to consent to sex. He's not a Democrat or a lawyer, he's a clown

Dershowitz is a Harvard legal scholar. You might have changed you opinion of Harvard when it was Harvard then .He is a democrat who sees through the lies.
He defends what is constitutional.
I won't mention he is tainted with Epstein shenanigans.


(3) Of course, you will conveniently ignore the evidence that supports the fraud allegations against Trump and his organization. The New York Attorney General's office has obtained millions of pages of documents, tax returns, and financial statements that show a pattern of lying about the value of assets to get loans and tax benefits. For example, Trump claimed that his Mar-a-Lago resort was worth between $426.5 million and $612.1 million, while the Palm Beach County appraiser valued it at between $18 million and $27.6 million. This is not a matter of opinion, but of facts. The jury will have to decide whether this amounts to fraud, not whether they love or hate Trump.

(4) I already know you're dishonest, but downplaying the harm that Trump's alleged fraud has caused to the public interest is just pathetic and disgraceful. Fraud is not a harmless prank. It robs the government of tax revenue that could be used for public services and programs, and also erodes the trust and confidence in the financial system and the rule of law. It is not fair or ethical that Trump and his organization should profit from dishonest and illegal practices, while others have to follow the rules and pay their fair share. The damages in this case are not zero, but huge and serious.

(5) I find it hilarious that you'd compare Mar-a-Lago to a pair of shoes. The value of a property is not determined by how many shoes it can buy, but by how many people want to buy it, where it is, what it looks like, what it offers, and other factors. Mar-a-Lago is not a unique or priceless property, but one of many clubs and resorts in Palm Beach County. Its value is not based on Trump's ego, but on objective and verifiable criteria. The fact that you have to use such a silly analogy shows that you have no valid argument to defend Trump's inflated valuation.

AmazonTopaz:

Biden go use Trump mop ground.

AmazonTopaz:

Biden go use Trump mop ground.

JessicaRabbit:


Challenge accepted! But first, pass the salt, because your confidence is seasoning my popcorn.

JessicaRabbit:


I appreciate your clarification about valuing assets, and I agree that a holistic approach is necessary. However, the New York Attorney General's case goes beyond brick and mortar. It alleges misrepresentation of property values to obtain loans and tax benefits. Whether the Trump brand has value isn't the question. It's whether that value was accurately represented.

Additionally, while some may see the Letitia James case as political, it's important to remember that violations of financial law are not partisan issues. The justice system should hold everyone accountable, regardless of their political affiliation.

As for the jury, they're instructed to base their verdict on evidence, not public opinion. The "ham sandwich" saying is a reminder of their power, not a justification for ignoring facts.

JessicaRabbit:


Once active on the Islam section? Very interesting. If you are pro Islam, then I guess that explains a lot.

DaHighLife:


The phrase goes, "A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich." It's essential to note the clear disparity between a Grand Jury and a Trial Jury, as well as between an Indictment and a Conviction; they are different. Basilico, based on his erratic and often inaccurate posts I've encountered here, appears to lack an understanding of these differences.
Contrary to his assertions, it is not an easy task for any prosecutor to secure a conviction for a ham sandwich.

basilico:

I am no lawyer, but I have enough common sense to know that juries are made up of people. People have their inherent biases, I would want to believe that some members of a jury walk into duty already with a fixed mind.
Similar to Engoron sham trial to determine how much to charge, having found Trump guilty of violating the statutes before the trial.
-translation-
I was wrong. Yet, instead of acknowledging my lack of understanding, I intend to deflect and pontificate on other matters, inevitably leading me to be wrong again.

DaHighLife:


You are aware that there is the option to simply acknowledge that you were wrong!

basilico:


What was I wrong about.A grand jury is for indicting purposes.
Members of the jury do have their biases .
I think it's possible using AI and data mining to select a jury likely to arrive at a desired verdict.

basilico:

In your defence of the jury, don't forget it's said a jury can indict a ham sandwich.

DaHighLife:


You and Jessica Rabbit were discussing the Carrol Trial and Jury.
Because it was a civil trial, it had a Trial Jury, distinct from a grand jury. A Trial Jury does not indict; rather, the correct expression goes, 'A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich,' highlighting the lower standard of proof required for indictment (probable cause) in Grand Juries compared to Trial Juries, whether in civil or criminal cases.



Most of your assertions on this topic seem confused. Considering what I've read in the past few pages, it might be simpler to ask: What have you gotten right?"

JessicaRabbit:


Once active on the Islam section? Very interesting. If you are pro Islam, then I guess that explains a lot.

zendi:

Hmn, Jessica, what lot does it explain?
I am a hardcore Christian, but I swim happily with basilico in the pond of truth commonsense.

basilico:
Dershowitz is a Harvard legal scholar. You might have changed you opinion of Harvard when it was Harvard then .He is a democrat who sees through the lies.
He defends what is constitutional.
I won't mention he is tainted with Epstein shenanigans.

Precisely the point. The appraiser took brick and mortar values plus annual revenue. I compared his finding to 77k pairs of shoes. Letitia is a publicist, her campaign funded by George Soros was a get Trump one.The jury decides on the strength of evidence the judge allows to seep through it. The bank loaned money, in the filings presented there was a clear disclaimer - Do your own evaluation and due diligence. Which they did, lent the money and got repaid in full with interest. Bank testified it was happy with the deal, a Soros lawyer Cooked the books . There is no victim , no damages warranted but hey Trump lied in his filings to banks. By that measure every time someone wants a loan in NYS he/she/they/them should ask Letitia and Engoron whether their valuations are correct. She went for a colonoscopy to look for a crime as if there are not other serious matters in her docket. Dershowitz says damages are paid to victims, we can do a 3 to 1 factor. Who was the victim in the loans lent out and repaid And who screwed up to not get top dollar from the loans?

So is Mar a Lago worth 19-27 m. If you have to value, you consider sales within the neighborhood also. Properties in that area go for much higher. I calculated his shoe price to show how ridiculous the appraiser was. I have mentioned brand value on other posts here. Michael Jackson 6 pairs of all his NBA titles winning sneakers fetched $8m in a Sotheby auction a few days ago. A third of Mar A Lago my foot. Brand value my friend.

By the way e don tire yourself wearing me down here . I'm resourceful.
And I'm never wrong.

And Joe Biden stole.

JessicaRabbit:


I hope you're aware that appealing to authority in this discussion is fallacious and irrelevant. Dershowitz's academic credentials do not make him immune to criticism or scrutiny.



Stop trying to distract from the main issue with yet more heaps of logical fallacies and misinformation. The point here is that Trump and his organization committed fraud by inflating and deflating the value of their assets depending on the situation. It's not a matter of different valuation methods, but of deliberate deception and manipulation. You are also ignoring the fact that Trump's fraud case is not only about loans, but also about tax benefits. He claimed millions of dollars in tax deductions based on inflated appraisals of his properties, which reduced his tax liability and deprived the public of revenue. This is a clear violation of the law and a harm to society. Then, coming to Letitia James, she is not a publicist. She is a duly elected official who has the authority and the duty to investigate and prosecute fraud and corruption. Beyond watery news sources and idle speculation, you don't have any proof that her case is based on political motives, as opposed to solid evidence.

I'm curious to know where you got the spurious information that Dershowitz has endorsed your absurd 3 to 1 factor, which has no basis in law or logic. He did state that Trump's fraud case is a serious one, and that he could face significant civil and criminal liability. He also said that the damages are not limited to the victims, but also to the public interest and the deterrence of future fraud.

Your argument here is weak, flawed and dishonest. You are only trying to defend the indefensible, and as usual, you are failing miserably.



You really don't get it, do you? Mar-a-Lago is not some fancy mansion that anyone with a fat wallet can buy. It's a private club that has more rules than a kindergarten classroom. It's completely nonsensical to compare it to other properties in the area that are actually useful and profitable. Do look up the meaning of False Equivocation. The value of Mar-a-Lago is based on how much money it makes, not on how famous or infamous its owner is. The county appraiser has done a good job of estimating its market value, which is way lower than what Trump thinks. Your shoe analogy is not only laughable, but pointless. Michael Jackson's sneakers are priceless treasures that his fans would kill for. They are not like a club that has a shrinking and unhappy membership, a track record of lawsuits, and a divisive owner. Brand value is not a magic trick that can turn a lemon into a gold mine. It is a factor that depends on many other factors, such as quality, reputation, demand, and customer satisfaction. Mar-a-Lago does not have a strong brand value, but a stained one.



Don't flatter yourself. You're not a challenge, you're a nuisance. And you're never wrong? That's a laugh. You're wrong about everything, especially who you think you are.



I don't know where I ever initiated this conversation with you. Apparently you have a tangent for every point on a circle. Kindly stay on topic. Thanks.

basilico:


Tax liability to NYS. You have invented a lie. There was no victim no damages There was a disclaimer according to Trump in every application.

You can't stop yourself from lying

You are lying about Mar a Lago. Anyone would want to buy it. Investors may look at the location of a property and buy it despite being a burial ground for pigs.

Letitia James is Soros funded.

I don have to add anything.

budaatum:


basiloco pro Islam? That cretin is so anti islam he makes antisemites sound good, which puts him in the same pond as zendi.

basilico:
Trump has to deposit around $400m if the appeal court is to take up the case. Very difficult cash/asset to raise.
If the intention was to smear him,the fines would have been lower. The judge's intention is to bankrupt him.

Two views of the judgement.

have been an investor for almost 30 years but certainly not at President Trump's level.

ANYONE with more than 6 weeks of experience in Real Estate knows that this is such a massive load of horse excrement.
EVERY investor puts down what they believe the collateral is worth. They then give a check to the potential lender who hires a 3rd party appraiser. The potential Borrower can not even know who the appraiser is until the written appraisal report is first sent to the Bank's lending committee for an internal review. THEN the report is sent to the borrower with appraised value and the comparable properties.

That system is designed so that the potential borrower can have ZERO input into it until the report is prepared.

Mind telling us how any fraud was perpetrated since the lender controls EVERY step of the process??



SouthrnDomSense
I was a senior commercial banker with one of the “Big Four” banks for almost 20 years.
President Trump was convicted of fraud when no one was defrauded. He’s been ordered to pay over $360M in damages where no one was damaged.
A bank is required by law to rely on their own appraisal preformed by one of their chosen third party appraiser, which the borrower reimburses the bank for. The borrower has to provide audited financial statements by an accounting firm approved by the bank. The audited financials have the assets valued according to “Generally Accepted Accounting Rules”, which are very specific and based primarily on the properties original cost. Market value is whatever a willing buyer and seller agree upon. Appraised value is a subjective estimate of market value that can be determined by several different methodologies.
The decision by the Court is the true fraud.

DaHighLife:
It appears that the GOP witness under arrest has demonstrated a more significant level of misconduct than was originally anticipated. The testimony provided by the GOP's witness lends credence to the assertion that Russia did indeed play a role in the Hunter Biden narrative.
I am certain that there were individuals within this forum who wrongly advocated for the validity of this bribery accusation