Comments by "" (@badluck5647) on "Forbes Reporter Explains 'The Big Looming Question' In The Trump NYC Fraud Trial" video.

@hughjanus5518 No, but it is illustrating why defrauding someone into a risky loan is illegal even if they bank is paid back. I'm not sure how I can dumb it down more for you.
9
@hughjanus5518 If you send money to a "Nigerian prince," then is the fraudster innocent of a crime because you didn't do your due diligence?
5
@watsamatau Trump lied about hard facts like square footage and development restrictions. These aren't subjective. The other estimates are based on Trump's tax accessors, whom Trump signed off on. Lastly, if Trump didn't want the judge to decide the case, then he should have requested a jury trial.
5
Let's say a fraudster says they have a low risk investment in real estate, and they will pay you back in a year. Instead, they used the money to buy lottery tickets. Would be a crime if the lottery tickets happened to win enough money to pay back the loan?
4
@watsamatau If I tell the bank that it has a bigger square footage than it does and that it can be further developed when it legally can't, then am I defrauding the bank?
4
@hughjanus5518 Is the "Nigerian prince" your grandma sent money to innocent of a crime because she should have done more due diligence to see if the person was lying? Trump's "due diligence" argument is that the victim is to blame for not seeing through the fraudster's lies.
2
They were willing to give loans to Trump he might be able to pay back because Trump lied about the value of his collateral.
1
Square footage and zoning aren't subjective. Trump lied to defraud the banks.
1
@rhet1016 I do like the new argument that Trump didn't lie to the banks because he lied to the IRS to commit tax fraud instead.
1
Trump agreed with the $18 million dollar assessment so he would have lower taxes. Are you claiming Trump committed tax fraud instead of bank fraud?
1
It is fraud to give the banks false information. Square footage and lies about zoning for example.
1
@butteryfriedwizard2219 It's still fraud. Trump lied to the banks about the value of his collateral to con the banks into transactions that they normally would find too risky. Just because Trump's gambles paid off, that doesn't mean he didn't defraud the banks. This is the law. Just because you disagree with it, that doesn't mean it doesn't apply to you or anyone else.
1
@watsamatau The banks testified under oath that they relied on Trump's statements for their decision, and most of those banks now refuse to do business with Trump when his fraud was revealed. Also, those banks would have definitely sued if Trump had to sell his overvalued property at its real value in order to repay his loans.
1
Trump, Clinton, etc
1
@blackjesus804 Bill Clinton
1