Rongagin71 said:

---

I'm not sure what year the judge was talking about Mar-A-Lago being only worth $18million, but would it have had to be way back and before massive improvements? Or the Judge is a liar.

---

The judge didn't say it was only worth $18mm

That was the value found by tax appraiser. Because it can't be sold as an individual residence, it's not taxed based on its value like other properties

Its value for tax appraiser is based on the income generated as private club.

You're pretending.

The judge specifically found Trump inflated values of his properties, to include Mar-a-Lago, which the judge said should have been valued between $18 million and $26.5 million.


"From 2011-2021, the Palm Beach County Assessor appraised the market value of Mar-a-Lago at between $18 million and $27.6 million," Engoron wrote in his ruling.

The judge noted Trump valued Mar-a-Lago at between $426.5 million and $612 million, "an overvaluation of at least 2,300%, compared to the assessor's appraisal."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/03/business/trump-fraud-judge-mar-a-lago/index.html

Can you imagine the government seizing the property of every citizen who lists their home for sale at an amount over the property tax appraisal?

So not only did this imbecile/partisan hack ignore reality when determining Trump somehow defrauded lenders by claiming his properties values were at fair-market value AND instructing lenders to do their own assessments, but he punished Trump not for the excess profits of a loan being offered at a percent or two lower but illegally calculated the ENTIRE value of the transaction in his judgment.

It should scare the **** out of every American that the judicial system could be abused in this manner, but those with TDS naively believe it could never happen to them.

pretending? What does that even mean ?

I literally told you what the basis of the 18 million was. That's not a opinion I have, that's a fact.


That does not mean Trump committed fraud, I don't think he did. It also does not mean that the judge using that figure was valid. I don't think it was.

Did you ever find out how to get a Longhorn tag?
And what will you do with it?
This intrigues me, I see possibilities...

"The judge didn't say it was only worth $18mm
That was the value found by tax appraiser."

So the judge DID say Mar-a-Lago was worth $18 million to $26.5 million. Just because someone else claimed it first doesn't mean he didn't say it.
Had he been honest, he would have concluded it was worth somewhere around $500 million, and Letitia's Lawfare would have been dismissed.

Reality Check said:

---

You're pretending.

The judge specifically found Trump inflated values of his properties, to include Mar-a-Lago, which the judge said should have been valued between $18 million and $26.5 million.


"From 2011-2021, the Palm Beach County Assessor appraised the market value of Mar-a-Lago at between $18 million and $27.6 million," Engoron wrote in his ruling.

The judge noted Trump valued Mar-a-Lago at between $426.5 million and $612 million, "an overvaluation of at least 2,300%, compared to the assessor's appraisal."

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/03/business/trump-fraud-judge-mar-a-lago/index.html

Can you imagine the government seizing the property of every citizen who lists their home for sale at an amount over the property tax appraisal?

So not only did this imbecile/partisan hack ignore reality when determining Trump somehow defrauded lenders by claiming his properties values were at fair-market value AND instructing lenders to do their own assessments, but he punished Trump not for the excess profits of a loan being offered at a percent or two lower but illegally calculated the ENTIRE value of the transaction in his judgment.

It should scare the **** out of every American that the judicial system could be abused in this manner, but those with TDS naively believe it could never happen to them.

---

Robert Heinlein proposed having property owners set the valuation on their own properties. Not only would taxes be assessed based on those valuations, they would also be a guaranteed selling price for the property.

How would this be a guaranteed selling price? The market determines the selling price not the taxable value

jt2hunt said:

---

How would this be a guaranteed selling price? The market determines the selling price not the taxable value

---

That was his proposal, not the way it is actually done.

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

Rongagin71 said:

---

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

---

Just make it up as you wish. Show your bias to all the world.

I'm the one who has said he doesn't like Trump and never have voted for him.
But I will if the choice is Biden.
You are the guy celebrating the tyrannical treatment of Trump,
so not surprising that you think I'm biased and Heinlen isn't.

Rongagin71 said:

---

I'm the one who has said he doesn't like Trump and never have voted for him.
But I will if the choice is Biden.
You are the guy celebrating the tyrannical treatment of Trump,
so not surprising that you think I'm biased and Heinlen isn't.

---

Being willing to leave a weak case up to the courts to sort out is "biased"?

eric76 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I'm the one who has said he doesn't like Trump and never have voted for him.
But I will if the choice is Biden.
You are the guy celebrating the tyrannical treatment of Trump,
so not surprising that you think I'm biased and Heinlen isn't.

---

Being willing to leave a weak case up to the courts to sort out is "biased"?

---

There was no jury. There was a Trump hating AG and a Trump hating judge.
And both were part of a massive Dem Party plan to smear Trump in as many
ways as possible - something they would call election interference if Trump had done it.
The people of NY used to love Trump, but he got off script and defeated Hilary.
A mega-storm of bad publicity and orchestrated legal attacks commenced, and have grown more and more virulent - I actually think Trump will be assassinated if he does get elected.

A kangaroo court?

eric76 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

---

Just make it up as you wish. Show your bias to all the world.

---

You talking about bias is hilarious.

Quote:

---

Shortly after New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a letter asking the New York Supreme Court to "not consider" that the $464 million bond former President Donald Trump needs to post to keep his assets from being seized is a "practical impossibility," the court ordered her to remove it.
The letter was attached to a request to file a surreplya reply to a replywhich generally isn't done unless the court grants express permission.

In a March 21 letter, the defense argued that, predictably, the letter received widespread media coverage even though it was "improperly filed" and taken down the same day, refiled with only the request and no letter.

"The Court may draw its own conclusions about the propriety of this maneuver. In doing so, the Court is 'not required to exhibit a naivet from which ordinary citizens are free,'" the defense wrote, urging the court to deny the attorney general's request.

In the original letter, Ms. James had asked the court not to accept the testimonies of a Trump attorney and broker who detailed the efforts they'd gone through in trying to obtain a $464 million bond, claiming they were unreliable sources. The defense faulted the state for not providing any "reason to doubt any of their assertions," however, and only making a blanket statement.

"While attempting to cynically and wrongfully tar the Defendants' witnesses as 'unreliable,' the Attorney General does not actually dispute the truth of a single one of their specific claims," the defense's letter reads.


The sworn affidavits submitted revealed that the defense had sought out the large bond since before final judgment was enteredraising the fine from $250 million to more than $350 million during the last days of trialand that negotiations by four brokers with 30-plus surety companies still resulted in no deal. One of the brokers provided additional context, saying a $100 million bond was considered large and a $464 million bond (which includes the ordered interest) is something few sureties have the ability to issue and would issue only for large publicly traded companies.

The attorney general had argued that these affidavits still didn't provide enough information on why the defendants had been turned down, suggesting that Trump Organization assets aren't as valuable as the defense claims.

The defense sought to rebut several such details in the March 21 letter to the court, arguing that the state was wrong in its assertion that the defendants didn't spend enough time trying to obtain a bond, arguing they had undergone critical negotiations just this past week and that efforts were ongoing even while the defense tried to obtain a stay.

---

Epoch Times

What I'm learning from this case is that if I'm ever a judge and don't like a defendant, all I have to do is make up a disgorgement of roughly a trillion dollars and then the defendant can't even appeal my judgement .

aggiejayrod said:

---

What I'm learning from this case is that if I'm ever a judge and don't like a defendant, all I have to do is make up a disgorgement of roughly a trillion dollars and then the defendant can't even appeal my judgement .

---

Yep. This is fascism.

Make allegations. Use novel legal theories and statutes created for completely different circumstances to attack political foes. Prosecute allegations. Convict. Order an outrageous fine. Order an outrageous bond to be able to appeal. Tell the world that the "justice system" has spoken.

And millions of Americans, including some "unbiased" posters on this board just nod along as if this is the way things are supposed to work.

We're just about done here.

Once agan we see that AG James understands nothing about how business in the financial world is done. Certainly not at Trump's level.

If 30 large sureties were consulted on issuing the appeal bond and they all said they could not do that (likely an underwriting issue is my guess) neither she nor Engeron get to call them liars.

Fundamental failure to understand that these people want to do business and make money with Trump but if their risk/benefit analysis plus the time involved for what could be a multi-year appeal process would hamstring their continuing to do business and issue other surety bonds due to the limits on their reserves and amount of exposure, they just cannot swing it.

Think about the hole AIG dug for themselves with those bundled mortgage default swaps before 2008. They wrote and issued more than they could afford to pay when the SHTF.

This is way too early speculation, but Andy thinks that
Jack Smith has admitted that Trump, if elected Pres,
can appoint an AG with the power to dismiss charges'
Smith is probably saying that to stir up the Left,
and will flip flop if Trump actually is elected.

https://conservativebrief.com/trump-latest-81964/?utm_source=CB&utm_medium=DJD

aggiejayrod said:

---

What I'm learning from this case is that if I'm ever a judge and don't like a defendant, all I have to do is make up a disgorgement of roughly a trillion dollars and then the defendant can't even appeal my judgement .

---

Trump can appeal without paying any money. If the NY AG is moving on his assets at the deadline, Trump is still appealing. It's just that he can't stop the collection on the judgment.

Now you know.

shiftyandquick said:

---

aggiejayrod said:

---

What I'm learning from this case is that if I'm ever a judge and don't like a defendant, all I have to do is make up a disgorgement of roughly a trillion dollars and then the defendant can't even appeal my judgement .

---

Trump can appeal without paying any money. If the NY AG is moving on his assets at the deadline, Trump is still appealing. It's just that he can't stop the collection on the judgment.

Now you know.

---

What if they take that trillion dollars out of your bank account that you need to pay your attorneys?

shiftyandquick said:

---

aggiejayrod said:

---

What I'm learning from this case is that if I'm ever a judge and don't like a defendant, all I have to do is make up a disgorgement of roughly a trillion dollars and then the defendant can't even appeal my judgement .

---

Trump can appeal without paying any money. If the NY AG is moving on his assets at the deadline, Trump is still appealing. It's just that he can't stop the collection on the judgment.

Now you know.

---

That is true. He can still appeal. BUT he will be irreparably harmed by the AG's actions and there will never be a remedy to make him whole from that.

Quote:

---

If 30 large sureties were consulted on issuing the appeal bond and they all said they could not do that (likely an underwriting issue is my guess) neither she nor Engeron get to call them liars.

---

if the affidavit evidence about difficulty in obtaining the bonds had come from the bonding companies, I do not think that we would be facing this issue. The question is whether Trump (and his subordinates, agents and attorneys) can be trusted to provide credible testimony.

"Judge, we cannot find a bond, and you'll just have to trust us on this" is very different than "Judge, I'm a vice president at Chubb, and we have rejected this bond."

Quote:

---

Fundamental failure to understand that these people want to do business and make money with Trump but if their risk/benefit analysis plus the time involved for what could be a multi-year appeal process would hamstring their continuing do to do business and issue other surety bonds due to the limits on their reserves and amount of exposure, they just cannot swing it.

---

True.

with enough security from Trump, they would be willing to do so, but it would appear that he lacks the equity to provide enough security to give them the comfort level that they need.

One wonders whether that might be an indicator that his properties do indeed not have the value that he represented.

Rockdoc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

---

Just make it up as you wish. Show your bias to all the world.

---

You talking about bias is hilarious.

---

I can't even imagine a Trump cultist who isn't biased to ridiculous degrees.

eric76 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

---

Just make it up as you wish. Show your bias to all the world.

---

You talking about bias is hilarious.

---

I can't even imagine a Trump cultist who isn't biased to ridiculous degrees.

---

I can't imagine a TDS cultist without the same problem.

eric76 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

---

Just make it up as you wish. Show your bias to all the world.

---

You talking about bias is hilarious.

---

I can't even imagine a Trump cultist who isn't biased to ridiculous degrees.

---

Your love for a fascist state is quite weird and revealing.

It could be that the insurers don't want to be hounded by the crazy NY AG, get lawfared, or deal with a vindictive NYS Department of Financial Services.

We don't know exactly now and may never obtain a straight answer.

bobbranco said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

---

Just make it up as you wish. Show your bias to all the world.

---

You talking about bias is hilarious.

---

I can't even imagine a Trump cultist who isn't biased to ridiculous degrees.

---

Your love for a fascist state is quite weird and revealing.

---

Fascist state?

It's the cult who demands that everyone think and do as themselves.

From my point of view, you are entirely free to believe as you wish. I may try to debate the issues and change your mind, but I make no demands that you be rational.

Until what?

eric76 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

I follow Heinlen because he makes interesting points,
but this was just another pretend point by a guy
whose hatred of Trump is not pretend.

---

Just make it up as you wish. Show your bias to all the world.

---

You talking about bias is hilarious.

---

I can't even imagine a Trump cultist who isn't biased to ridiculous degrees.

---

Your love for a fascist state is quite weird and revealing.

---

Fascist state?

It's the cult who demands that everyone think and do as themselves.

From my point of view, you are entirely free to believe as you wish. I may try to debate the issues and change your mind, but I make no demands that you be rational.

---

Your opinions lost any sway with me, and likely others, long before your Zimmerman / Martin meltdown vis a vis "where's the blood". Countless other times including this instance. In light of this, when you feel the need to "debate the issues and change minds" you may think you are rational but unfortunately you are far from rational. Maybe it's only the TDS but whatever it's unhealthy. Have a great day.