Butler, the point is that it is an act of fraud to misrepresent something to seek an advantage you would otherwise may not be entitled to. That is to say that the mere credit application using false information is an act of fraud.
Doesn't matter if the fraudulent application resulted in a loan that was paid back in full. Or if the bank was happy or it made money.
The mere misrepresentation is fraud.
The 'victim' is the public in this case.
Among other risks to society and the financial system, if people are given a pass if their fraud pays off with nobody losing money, then what discourages others from trying the same scheme themselves? And the resultant harms to society and the financial system for the frauds in which people do lose money? Lots of stories of
well meaning financial genius' finding themselves in a tight spot and doubling down on their promises to raise more money from their existing investors to try to recover honestly lost investments. Using that money to keep the original investors invested and not bailing out. Many Ponzi schemes start out honestly.
One thing to keep in mind when it comes to civil litigation. Alleging fraud is about as serious of an accusation as a plaintiff can make in Civil Court.
You better have a very strong case with real evidence. Otherwise you risk not only your case being thrown out in its entirety, but the Judge
will impose serious sanctions against the party alleging fraud. The implications can be worse than contempt of court or perjury!
Unlike in Canada, in the USA, the losing party is not liable for costs. Even if you win in the USA, you don't get your costs reimbursed. But if fraud is alleged and not proven, the Court pretty much awards costs against the party alleging unproven fraud as well as punitive damages.
Dismissing or accepting the nonsense that some old Judge close to retirement is part of some global secret cabal, the Judge had better be absolutely certain that the alleged frauds did,
in fact, occur. Especially when he could determine the facts and render a judgement based solely on the written submissions and documentary evidence. Trump had ample opportunity to make his arguments and enter evidence as to the veracity of the fraud claims. He didn't.
All that you saw was the penalty assessment phase. That is where Trump belligerently grandstanded about the values being accurate etc. That ship had already sailed. He used the penalty hearings as some lame grandstand to try to re-argue the case he had already lost. And in doing so, cost him half a billion dollars. Which may very well be the end of his business empire.
Had he shown any sort of contrition, even with excuses, and promised to make sure it doesn't happen again, he might have saved himself a few hundred million and his empire.
Butler, trust me on this ONE thing if anything. Do not rely on what Kevin O'Leary says. First and foremost, he is a self-admitted short, bald attention-seeking
entertainer. He craftily represents himself
as a billionaire. He is not. Don't get me wrong, Kevin is a brilliant guy, with a sharp mind and a skill for communicating like few others.
Real estate developers who lie to the banks quickly get blacklisted. Unless you already owe them hundreds of millions.
Then they will ask you to go along with their lies!
There is a saying; "If you owe the bank a million dollars and they want their money back,
you are in trouble. If you owe the bank a billion dollars and they want their money back,
they are in trouble.
She indeed targeted Trump. Trump paints a
on his forehead every time he brags about his wealth and how he knows how to game the corrupt system himself! The tallest blade of grass is the first to get cut too!
As for not applying the law equally? Do you mean to say that because not
every fraudster is pursued, that
none can be pursued?
First off, just because
you didn't get the thousands of other cases in the system pushed to your right wing social media feed through Twitter and/or Truth Social and/or Fox, doesn't mean hundreds of credit and other financial fraud cases are not investigated or brought to court every day.
YES! Damn straight! Fucking right I would!!! Bring it on! Charge or bring civil litigation against Joe Biden for whatever, if there is real evidence. I am NOT a tribalist.
I have seen so much fraud in the real estate and development biz and the chaos it causes to everyday people that I want
any fraudsters pursued. And
especially those seeking or holding public office!
What experience or insight into the actual case do you have to say "probably'? Hope is not grounds for an appeal.
Fuck, not even Trump's lawyers are claiming "the law" is "flimsy" . I assume you mean the 'statute' is flimsy. He was not charged criminally. "The law" you say is flimsy is based on hundreds of years of case law and the principles of
res judicata are not easily overturned.
The appeal has to be based on errors of law. Not re-trying the facts of the case. Karen threatening to call for the Manager does not work.
Having said that.... if Trump's appeal before a panel of Appellate Court Judges, is unsuccessful, will you accept that he is fraudster
then?
