Mara Lago to be liquidated?

Lionfish said:
QPeeeee,
If you weren't so dumb, arrogant, and filled with TDS, you would have stopped at the end of your first sentence. DERP, DERP, DERP!
Click to expand...

Only a really stupid thinks that. So congrats on owning it.

In NO WAY does the banks responsibility to do its own diligence make it legal for any applicant to submit all fraudulent claims in documents.

That you keep arguing that anyone can submit fraud because the banks do some diligence only continues to highlight how deeply stupid you are.


It is ILLEGAL to submit fraudulent document even if the Bank does diligence.
 
Doc Dutch said:
While I strongly doubt Trump will ever go to prison, I definitely agree TrumpCo will be collapsed economically.

That said, there's a good chance Trump will face house arrest.
Click to expand...

Yup. that is my position too.


Can you imagine being as stupid as LyingFish and thinking and arguing it is legal to submit fraudulent bank and insurance forms because the Banks and Insurance companies do some diligence on all files?

LyingFish really thinks he got me on this one. That 'because i agree banks and insurance co do some diligence' he then thinks that means anyone can lie and submit fraudulent doc's.

How did this forum end up with such base stupid posters? (that is a serious question)
 
QP! said:
Yup. that is my position too.


Can you imagine being as stupid as LyingFish and thinking and arguing it is legal to submit fraudulent bank and insurance forms because the Banks and Insurance companies do some diligence on all files?

LyingFish really thinks he got me on this one. That 'because i agree banks and insurance co do some diligence' he then thinks that means anyone can lie and submit fraudulent doc's.

How did this forum end up with such base stupid posters? (that is a serious question)
Click to expand...

LIkely correct, but I really want him to get 10 days, just for precedents sake.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
because the issue isn't what did he list as the value in a tax appeal, the issue is whether what he listed on his loan application was fraud......everyone knows it wasn't........on appeal the court will examine whether the judge's decision as to a material fact was reasonable in the light of the evidence......the appeals court is apt to determine the judge is a mindless fuckwit and remand it for a REAL finding of fact.......
Click to expand...

And while there are many core, factually quoted, cited and displayed OTHER written statements of Fraud by Trump, i have highlighted, this one i quote above which is really core to the fraud James presented.


The current residency controversy tracks back to a deal Trump cut in 1993 when his finances were foundering, and the cost of maintaining Mar-a-Lago was soaring into the multimillions each year. Under the agreement, club members are banned from spending more than 21 days a year in the club’s guest suites and cannot stay there for any longer than seven consecutive days. Before the arrangement was sealed, an attorney for Trump assured the town council in a public meeting that he would not live at Mar-a-Lago.

At the time, the town’s leaders were wary of Trump because he had sued them after they blocked his attempt to subdivide the historic Mar-a-Lago property into multiple housing lots. Placing the limitations on lengths of stays assured that Trump’s property would remain a private club, as he had promised, rather than a residential hotel.
Click to expand...

In short, Trump agreed to a slew of development concessions in order to try to boost Mar-a-Lago’s bottom line. In the years since, Trump’s angered local residents with his willingness to skirt even the most basic principles of the agreement. ... In addition to the 1993 agreement with Palm Beach, Trump “also signed a document deeding development rights for Mar-a-Lago to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, a Washington-based, privately funded nonprofit organization that works to save historic sites around the country,” according to the Post. “As part of the National Trust deal, Trump agreed to ‘forever’ relinquish his rights to develop Mar-a-Lago or to use it for ‘any purpose other than club use.’ ...”

cite
Click to expand...

Trump used the above to argue the property was worth LESS than the Assessed value of $16MM when he disputed the tax assessors assessment.

Trump then went across the road to Banks and INsurance company and filed papers saying due to the speculative redevelopment value it was worth 2000+% more than the Assessed value, despite Trump knowing he contracted those rights away.
 
Jarod said:
I just saw that Mar-a-Lago is owned by one of the New York Corporations ordered to be liquidated.

If things Stand as they currently Old Trumpy could be homeless
Click to expand...

Another dumb prediction from the fake attorney full time loon. :palm:
 
QP! said:
Only a really stupid thinks that. So congrats on owning it.

In NO WAY does the banks responsibility to do its own diligence make it legal for any applicant to submit all fraudulent claims in documents.

That you keep arguing that anyone can submit fraud because the banks do some diligence only continues to highlight how deeply stupid you are.


It is ILLEGAL to submit fraudulent document even if the Bank does diligence.
Click to expand...

DERP, DERP, DERP!
 
PostmodernProphet said:
it would be really, really funny if the court ordered it liquidated to pay the fines because Trump said it was worth more than 18M and then it sells for $200M.....talk about grounds for appeal on the basis of judicial error in a finding of fact.......
Click to expand...

Not actually a grounds of appeal since one of the claims being argued in court is that Trump is claiming he can used values expected in 2023 as the basis for value in 2013.
No matter what the value is in 2023, even if it sells then, it is not the value in 2013.
 
QP! said:
Only a really stupid thinks that. So congrats on owning it.

In NO WAY does the banks responsibility to do its own diligence make it legal for any applicant to submit all fraudulent claims in documents.

That you keep arguing that anyone can submit fraud because the banks do some diligence only continues to highlight how deeply stupid you are.


It is ILLEGAL to submit fraudulent document even if the Bank does diligence.
Click to expand...

:laugh:

Ah! So you admit they do their own independent assessments, correct? :laugh:

And don't make any loans without doing so, either.
 
Matt Dillon said:
:laugh:

Ah! So you admit they do their own independent assessments, correct? :laugh:

And don't make any loans without doing so, either.
Click to expand...

All banks and insurance companies do SOME of their own diligence while ALSO relying on what is called 'attestation' in executed and signed binding legal documents. NO one has EVER denied that.

That you and LyingFish think acknowledging that means you can lie and submit fraudulent documents without any culpibility is just a testament to how stupid you are.


The laws that put you in jail for submitting fraudulent documents, DO NOT say 'you get a pass if the bank or insurance company also does some of its own diligence'.


But i invite you to try it and then to use your defense. Go to your nearest bank and apply for a loan and fill out nothing but lies and fraudulent info and then when the police visit say 'I am immune to prosecution as the banks do some of their own diligence'.


it is hard to imagine a place with the depths of this stupidity that you guys actually believe that is a gotcha and defense. That you are convinced if Point 1 is true (banks do diligence) that means gov't cannot charge you with fraud for submnitting fraudulent documents. It is hard to beloeive anyone is that stupid but boy,... you guys sure do all you can to convince us you are.
 
QP! said:
All banks and insurance companies do SOME of their own diligence while ALSO relying on what is called 'attestation' in executed and signed binding legal documents. NO one has EVER denied that.

That you and LyingFish think acknowledging that means you can lie and submit fraudulent documents without any culpibility is just a testament to how stupid you are.


The laws that put you in jail for submitting fraudulent documents, DO NOT say 'you get a pass if the bank or insurance company also does some of its own diligence'.


But i invite you to try it and then to use your defense. Go to your nearest bank and apply for a loan and fill out nothing but lies and fraudulent info and then when the police visit say 'I am immune to prosecution as the banks do some of their own diligence'.


it is hard to imagine a place with the depths of this stupidity that you guys actually believe that is a gotcha and defense. That you are convinced if Point 1 is true (banks do diligence) that means gov't cannot charge you with fraud for submnitting fraudulent documents. It is hard to beloeive anyone is that stupid but boy,... you guys sure do all you can to convince us you are.
Click to expand...

I don't need no loans, brah! :awesome:

Letitia James failed to (nee deliberately did not) disclose a $770k outstanding loan on a mortgage application though.
 
Matt Dillon said:
I don't need no loans, brah! :awesome:

Letitia James failied to disclose a $770k outstanding loan on a mortgage application though.
Click to expand...

that you think if you did need a loan that you can lie and write fraudulent statements and not be charged, telling the police 'The bank does it own diligence thus i am free to lie and make fraudulent statements' is why you are stupid.
 
QP! said:
that you think if you did need a loan that you can lie and write fraudulent statements and not be charged, telling the police 'The bank does it own diligence thus i am free to lie and make fraudulent statements' is why you are stupid.
Click to expand...

So you think you're clairvoyant, aye?

What am I thinking right now? :laugh:

























































If you guessed "That QPI sure is a mental midget of a dishonest commie fucktard shill", you got it right! :awesome:
 
Phantasmal said:
I can’t find any legitimate sources. I’ll wait for confirmation from them.
Click to expand...

I take it you found an "illegimate" source then? :laugh:

Yeah you did! H4rh4rD33H4rH4r!
laughing.gif


Lemme guess, you wish you could unsee that face, huh? :laugh:

Well, it ain't purty. :dunno: Not by any stretch of the imagination.

You could try searching the public records yourself, you know. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top