Clock is ticking for Trump to post bonds worth half a billion dollars

[Truth Detector]

There is no such animal as bail in a civil case.

Eighth amendment. Read it halfwit.

Bail, penalties, cruel and unusual punishment.

 

[Truth Detector]

He broke clear and precise law.

You mean the unconstitutional law that has NEVER been used like this that excludes you from a jury trial? That law? It's an absurd and ludicrous unconstitutional law that will be reversed by the Supreme Court. If you had a brain, you wouldn't be defending it. But alas, it is apparent you lack brains.

The victims were those who play by the rules and the taxpayers.

Really? So how specifically were the taxpayers and rules players damaged? Elaborate so the forum van see how retarded your illogical views really are.

There is no lending institution that must say he cheated me in order to be guilty.

The claim was that he cheated the banks. The banks said they were happy to give the company huge loans and would do it again. Perhaps you should turn off MSNBC. It's making you dumber, assuming one could get much dumber.

You can deny all the fuck you care to but the asshole was found guilty, his dipshit followers like yourself can make all the stupid claims you want but Trump is going to pay.

WOW! So not only are you too stupid to comprehend the laws, the constitution and how absurd this case was, but you're severely triggered with TDS.

 

[Truth Detector]

Trump Ordered To Pay Over $350 Million In Civil Fraud Case As Judge Finds Ex-President Knowingly Committed Fraud

New York AG says she’ll seize Donald Trump’s property if he can’t pay $454 million civil fraud debt

Judge in Trump fraud case denies request to pause $354 million judgment

Judge Denies Trump’s Delayed Payment Request In E. Jean Carroll Case

Trump sets aside $5.5 million in first step to satisfy E. Jean Carroll judgment

He has already set aside over 5 million in judgements so don't say he isn't going to have to pay.

Stuck on stupid I see.

 

[Truth Detector]

There is nothing in the laws your asshole broke that state there must be victims, certainly not banks.

So, this is a law that does not require a crime or a victim? Sounds pretty shabby don't you think?

 

[Truth Detector]

Do you just like to make shit up?

Projecting.

 

[Truth Detector]

What about all those persons who didn't lie on those documents and for one reason or another were turned down? How about the taxpayers who were cheated out of millions in taxes? You claim no one was harmed but that is only because you are an idiot that worships your velveeta man and would like to believe that.

What a massive pile of strawman bile. So, let me understand this lame argument; so Trump got a loan which caused others to NOT get their loans? How is that even possible. Many get turned down loans, is that a criminal act?

You give new meaning to the term "uneducated partisan hack."

 

[Truth Detector]

It won't be overturned, not a chance.

Saving this for posterity.

 

[QP!]

Terry, are you going to even attempt a direct and honest answer to this very simple question?

Okay, I'll answer your idiotic, poorly conceived, question directly.
...

You did not answer my question. not even a little bit as it is not about Trump.

So once again here is the question simplified for you Terry.

- New Mortgage Broker office opens. It is discovered by law enforcement, on its first attempt to sell to numerous banks that every single mortgage they have bundles is fraudulent (NINJA loans). Good news is that none of the banks offered the loans to buy bought any but the Mortgage Brokerage is known to be targeting more banks and private investors trying to sell them off.

Terry is it your view that the government CANNOT stop this firm by charging them and shutting them down, and they must allow them to continue to operate and seek a buyer because there is no victim yet? That the documents crime of submitting fraudulent forms, is not a crime, UNTIL the loans are funded and eventually at least one defaults, creating a victim?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Terry, are you going to even attempt a direct and honest answer to this very simple question?



You did not answer my question. not even a little bit as it is not about Trump.

So once again here is the question simplified for you Terry.

- New Mortgage Broker office opens. It is discovered by law enforcement, on its first attempt to sell to numerous banks that every single mortgage they have bundles is fraudulent (NINJA loans). Good news is that none of the banks offered the loans to buy bought any but the Mortgage Brokerage is known to be targeting more banks and private investors trying to sell them off.

Terry is it your view that the government CANNOT stop this firm by charging them and shutting them down, and they must allow them to continue to operate and seek a buyer because there is no victim yet? That the documents crime of submitting fraudulent forms, is not a crime, UNTIL the loans are funded and eventually at least one defaults, creating a victim?

When you ask a question that isn't loaded, you might get an answer that is worthwhile.

 

[QP!]

When you ask a question that isn't loaded, you might get an answer that is worthwhile.

Terry you do not understand what a loaded question is.

If i ask you 'do you think theft should be prosecuted more aggressively than it is, in certain States' , you Terry should be able to offer your opinion on that. Your answer can yes or no and you can supply details if you want.


If i ask you' should a New Mortgage Broker who submits fraudulent documents to banks be prosecutable or not, even if the bank does not fund them', you, Terry should be able to offer your opinion on that.


The reason, Terry, you find it 'loaded' is it is a 'leading' question. I am leading you to a logical conclusion you do not want to acknowledge. That is that you DO THINK documents fraud, even if not funded is a crime. And you know then once you admit that, I have lead you to admit your defense of Trump 'No victim... no crime' is bunk and is disproven.

So you do not want to be lead to answer that because you can see the implication on your prior arguments.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Terry you do not understand what a loaded question is.

If i ask you 'do you think theft should be prosecuted more aggressively than it is, in certain States' , you Terry should be able to offer your opinion on that. Your answer can yes or no and you can supply details if you want.


If i ask you' should a New Mortgage Broker who submits fraudulent documents to banks be prosecutable or not, even if the bank does not fund them', you, Terry should be able to offer your opinion on that.


The reason, Terry, you find it 'loaded' is it is a 'leading' question. I am leading you to a logical conclusion you do not want to acknowledge. That is that you DO THINK documents fraud, even if not funded is a crime. And you know then once you admit that, I have lead you to admit your defense of Trump 'No victim... no crime' is bunk and is disproven.

So you do not want to be lead to answer that because you can see the implication on your prior arguments.

Define "fraudulent documents." In Trump's case, the prosecutor and judge arbitrarily determined what that fraud was using values they chose out of thin air. It isn't as if they had a number of outside experts come in and make valuations for them.

So, if you submit paperwork with estimates of worth and property value to a bank and the bank comes back with different numbers, who's correct there?

 

[QP!]

Define "fraudulent documents." In Trump's case, the prosecutor and judge arbitrarily determined what that fraud was using values they chose out of thin air. It isn't as if they had a number of outside experts come in and make valuations for them.

So, if you submit paperwork with estimates of worth and property value to a bank and the bank comes back with different numbers, who's correct there?

Terry STOP talking about Trump. My question here is NOT about Trump.

I've explained the 'fraudulent documents' many times but here is one more.

A new Mortgage Broker Office opens tomorrow. They submit a bunch of mortgages, in a bundle to banks and private investors trying to sell them, but the banks and investors discover the documents are all fraudulent NINJA loans where the Mortgage Broker is manually putting in fake jobs and income for the applicants so they will pass, where otherwise they would be declined.

This is reported to the police.

Terry, this type of loan was submitted all the time pre 2007/8 mortgage crisis and contributed to the crash.

So the questions are :

- are you aware of this happening in the past (submission of Ninja Loans many of which had false information input in to them)?
- do you believe it is against the law to submit them with false information and can be charged even if not one of them is funded before the police shuts down the Brokerage?
- or do you think the current laws require the police leave them alone, and wait until someone buys the loans, and then until finally at least one loan defaults generating a loss?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Terry STOP talking about Trump. My question here is NOT about Trump.

I've explained the 'fraudulent documents' many times but here is one more.

A new Mortgage Broker Office opens tomorrow. They submit a bunch of mortgages, in a bundle to banks and private investors trying to sell them, but the banks and investors discover the documents are all fraudulent NINJA loans where the Mortgage Broker is manually putting in fake jobs and income for the applicants so they will pass, where otherwise they would be declined.

This is reported to the police.

Terry, this type of loan was submitted all the time pre 2007/8 mortgage crisis and contributed to the crash.

So the questions are :

- are you aware of this happening in the past (submission of Ninja Loans many of which had false information input in to them)?
- do you believe it is against the law to submit them with false information and can be charged even if not one of them is funded before the police shuts down the Brokerage?
- or do you think the current laws require the police leave them alone, and wait until someone buys the loans, and then until finally at least one loan defaults generating a loss?

Your question makes it an absolute. That is the documents are fraudulent. The correct version is how is that fraud determined?

 

[QP!]

Your question makes it an absolute. That is the documents are fraudulent. The correct version is how is that fraud determined?

Edit...

What?

The fraud is determined in my example however you want. A whistleblower in the office letting the banks and cops know. Or the banks themselves seeing names of mortgages they had applications prior on file they recognized and that they knew the data (job data and income) was wrong. The bank did calls to verify income. etc

you can assume whatever you want. The question assumes that is known and determined that these are NINJA loans which is not a hard thing to determine.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Edit...

What?

The fraud is determined in my example however you want. A whistleblower in the office letting the banks and cops know. Or the banks themselves seeing names of mortgages they had applications prior on file they recognized and that they knew the data (job data and income) was wrong. The bank did calls to verify income. etc

you can assume whatever you want. The question assumes that is known and determined that these are NINJA loans which is not a hard thing to determine.

Okay, I assumed the mortgage company, the banks, and the whistleblower had differences in opinion and there was no actual fraud.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Okay, I assumed the mortgage company, the banks, and the whistleblower had differences in opinion and there was no actual fraud.

Here is a simple question for you.
If I file a document with a bank that claims my house is mortgage free, 50,000 sq ft and worth $10,000,000 but it is really only 1,000 sq ft and I have a mortgage that puts me underwater, is the document true or false?
If I sign the document under penalty of perjury that it is true but I know it is false, did I commit a crime?

 

[QP!]

Okay, I assumed the mortgage company, the banks, and the whistleblower had differences in opinion and there was no actual fraud.

What the fuck are you talking about.

I am giving you a hypothetical. This is not difficult. In the hypothetical the Mortgage Broker DID create fraudulent documents. You do not counter a hypothetical by saying they did not do it.

There is nothing difficult or wrong with me posing the factors of my hypothetical. That is how they are done.

If i give you a hypothetical to assess where a person is arrested who robs a bank, you do not reply 'i assume he did not rob the bank'.
If i give you a hypothetical where a person is pulled over for speeding, you do not reply 'I assume he was not speeding'

You assess the hypothetical as offered or you duck and refuse to.


So i will ask one more time...

I've explained the 'fraudulent documents' many times but here is one more.

A new Mortgage Broker Office opens tomorrow. They submit a bunch of mortgages, in a bundle to banks and private investors trying to sell them, but the banks and investors discover the documents are all fraudulent NINJA loans where the Mortgage Broker is manually putting in fake jobs and income for the applicants so they will pass, where otherwise they would be declined.

This is reported to the police.

Terry, this type of loan was submitted all the time pre 2007/8 mortgage crisis and contributed to the crash.

So the questions are :

- are you aware of this happening in the past (submission of Ninja Loans many of which had false information input in to them)?
- do you believe it is against the law to submit them with false information and can be charged even if not one of them is funded before the police shuts down the Brokerage?
- or do you think the current laws require the police leave them alone, and wait until someone buys the loans, and then until finally at least one loan defaults generating a loss?

 

[Walt]

The weird part about it all is that if trump was an honest person, he could get a loan based on his assets.