Trump half-billion dollar civil penalty thrown out by appeals court

T. A. Gardner said:
What default are you talking about? Do you mean potential, future, fantasy loans that Trump might take out? If so, now you're in the realm of "Thought Crimes."
Click to expand...

AI summary:
Yes — Documents fraud can and will be prosecutable even if no loan is ultimately made and no financial loss occurs.


Here’s why:


  1. Attempted Fraud is Still a Crime
    • In most jurisdictions, submitting false documents with intent to deceive a lender, insurer, or government agency is itself a crime, regardless of whether money actually changes hands.
    • Think of it like attempted robbery: if someone tries to rob a bank but fails, the attempt is still prosecutable.
  2. False Document Crimes
    • Many states (and the federal system) have statutes that specifically criminalize forgery, false statements, or false filings.
    • For example, under U.S. federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1001), knowingly making a false statement to a financial institution or regulator is a crime even if no one suffers financial harm.
  3. Industry-Specific Laws
    • Mortgage brokers, auto finance professionals, and bankers often operate under licensing regimes. Fraudulent documentation (even without a completed loan) can result in license revocation and regulatory penalties, on top of potential criminal charges.

👉 Bottom line: Yes, fraudulent loan documents can and will be prosecuted, even if no money is lost and is often the core of cases brought in many big cities where they have a white collar crime unit, because the crime is in the deliberate deception and attempt to obtain funds unlawfully.
 
Last edited:
@T. A. Gardner 's reply to the above and below FACTS will be 'since i do not agree with it then even the legal citations showing the exact laws broken do not matter... no victim... no crime and no legislation cited can change that.' Despite charges not requiring any victim Terry will continue to say 'no victim, no crime'.

And why will he reply that?

Because he is stupid.
 
Last edited:
AI summary:
Yes — fraudulent documents are absolutely at the core of big-city white-collar crime units.


Here’s why:


1.​


  • Most complex financial crimes (bank fraud, securities fraud, mortgage fraud, healthcare fraud, procurement fraud, etc.) start with paper (or digital) lies:
    • Fake income statements
    • Forged deeds, titles, or contracts
    • False invoices or receipts
    • Misleading financial filings
  • The documents themselves are the “entry point” for the fraud, which is why prosecutors and investigators treat them as the backbone of the case.

2.​


  • In court, a fraudulent document is tangible evidence.
  • For example, in mortgage fraud, showing a broker knowingly submitted fake tax returns or pay stubs is much more direct than proving intent through circumstantial evidence alone.

3.​


  • In New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and other major hubs, DA’s offices and U.S. Attorney’s offices have fraud or economic crimes divisions.
  • These often revolve around document fraud investigations, including:
    • Real estate deed fraud (big in NYC)
    • Fake insurance claims (auto accidents, workers’ comp)
    • Shell company invoices (common in procurement fraud)
  • The Manhattan DA’s Major Economic Crimes Bureau, for example, has prosecuted cases where forged or misleading documents were the entire engine of multi-million-dollar frauds.

4.​


  • At the “street level,” document fraud might mean fake IDs, stolen checks, or falsified car loan paperwork.
  • At the “big city white-collar” level, it scales up to fraudulent bond offerings, cooked corporate books, or forged deeds worth millions.

👉 So yes: fraudulent filings are considered the bread-and-butter evidence of white-collar crime units, because they’re both the tool of the fraudster and the proof for prosecutors.
 
AI Summary:

Here are some real-world examples where fraudulent documents were the core of big city white-collar prosecutions.



1. Mortgage Fraud Schemes – NYC (2000s–2010s)​


  • The Manhattan DA’s Office and U.S. Attorney’s Office brought dozens of cases against mortgage brokers who submitted false pay stubs, tax returns, and bank statements to secure loans.
  • Case Example (2012, NY): A group of brokers and lawyers in Queens/Manhattan were convicted for creating fake deeds, shell companies, and falsified income documents to flip properties and defraud banks of $20M+.
  • The fraudulent documents were the entire crime — the loans wouldn’t have been made without them.


2. Auto Finance Fraud – Los Angeles (2019)​


  • In LA, prosecutors went after a ring of car dealers who submitted falsified loan applications with fake income/employment docs to secure financing.
  • Even when no car was sold, just the submission of false paperwork to a bank was enough for felony charges (bank fraud, wire fraud).
  • The fraud was uncovered when multiple lenders noticed identical fake pay stubs being used across unrelated loan apps.


3. Deed Theft / Real Estate Fraud – Brooklyn & Manhattan (2015–Present)​


  • One of the biggest focuses in NYC today is deed theft: criminals forge property documents (like quitclaim deeds, powers of attorney) to make it look like they own a brownstone or apartment building.
  • Brooklyn DA (2019): Several defendants indicted for filing fake deeds with the City Register to steal properties from elderly owners in Crown Heights and Bedford-Stuyvesant.
  • The only weapon in the crime was the fraudulent paperwork itself — no physical force, just filing fake docs with the city.


4. Healthcare Fraud – Chicago (2014)​


  • A Chicago medical billing company owner was indicted for creating false patient records, treatment forms, and invoices to bill Medicare for services never provided.
  • Here, again, documents were both the weapon and the evidence: the entire fraud was paper/electronic filing manipulation.


5. Corporate Accounting Fraud – Enron / WorldCom (NYC focus)​


  • At the very top end, the Enron (2001) and WorldCom (2002) scandals — prosecuted in NYC federal courts — revolved around fraudulent corporate filings:
    • Cooked books
    • False balance sheets
    • Misleading financial disclosures filed with the SEC
  • These “white-collar weapons” were just documents, but they sank companies worth billions.


✅ Pattern Across All Levels: Whether it’s a small auto loan scam in Los Angeles, deed fraud in Brooklyn, or multi-billion-dollar securities fraud in Manhattan, the common thread is fraudulent documents as the engine of the crime.
 
QP! said:
AI summary:
Yes — Documents fraud can and will be prosecutable even if no loan is ultimately made and no financial loss occurs.


Here’s why:


  1. Attempted Fraud is Still a Crime
    • In most jurisdictions, submitting false documents with intent to deceive a lender, insurer, or government agency is itself a crime, regardless of whether money actually changes hands.
    • Think of it like attempted robbery: if someone tries to rob a bank but fails, the attempt is still prosecutable.
  2. False Document Crimes
    • Many states (and the federal system) have statutes that specifically criminalize forgery, false statements, or false filings.
    • For example, under U.S. federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1001), knowingly making a false statement to a financial institution or regulator is a crime even if no one suffers financial harm.
  3. Industry-Specific Laws
    • Mortgage brokers, auto finance professionals, and bankers often operate under licensing regimes. Fraudulent documentation (even without a completed loan) can result in license revocation and regulatory penalties, on top of potential criminal charges.

👉 Bottom line: Yes, fraudulent loan documents can and will be prosecuted, even if no money is lost and is often the core of cases brought in many big cities where they have a white collar crime unit, because the crime is in the deliberate deception and attempt to obtain funds unlawfully.
Click to expand...
How were the documents made fraudulent? As one of the appellate judges wrote (paraphrasing) NY's law was never intended for the application that James put it to. The loans in question were made between two parties that were, and are, business savvy and knowledgeable. Both parties did due diligence in determining the value of assets used as collateral and entered the agreements with full knowledge that the terms were sound.

So, no, Trump didn't commit fraud and James and Eragon had to stretch the law like a rubber band into a Gordian knot to come to that conclusion.

The bank(s) testified they were satisfied with the terms of the loans and paid back in full. They further testified that they did their own due diligence so regardless of what Trump presented, they were fully aware and knowledgeable of what they were entering as a loan agreement.

James', or Eragon's personal opinion, and that's what they used, don't count here as to what constitutes fraud. They made it up as they went. It's pretty damn clear from the trial's conduct that they had a pre-drawn conclusion and were just doing the show trial to reach it. I doubt in a jury trial, something Eragon overruled immediately because he knew the jury might not go along, that Trump would have been found libel.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
How were the documents made fraudulent? As one of the appellate judges wrote (paraphrasing) NY's law was never intended for the application that James put it to. The loans in question were made between two parties that were, and are, business savvy and knowledgeable. Both parties did due diligence in determining the value of assets used as collateral and entered the agreements with full knowledge that the terms were sound.

So, no, Trump didn't commit fraud and James and Eragon had to stretch the law like a rubber band into a Gordian knot to come to that conclusion.

The bank(s) testified they were satisfied with the terms of the loans and paid back in full. They further testified that they did their own due diligence so regardless of what Trump presented, they were fully aware and knowledgeable of what they were entering as a loan agreement.

James', or Eragon's personal opinion, and that's what they used, don't count here as to what constitutes fraud. They made it up as they went. It's pretty damn clear from the trial's conduct that they had a pre-drawn conclusion and were just doing the show trial to reach it. I doubt in a jury trial, something Eragon overruled immediately because he knew the jury might not go along, that Trump would have been found libel.
Click to expand...
That Judge was debunked by the other Judges who pointed out that validity of the case was already ruled upon by their court and that question was not at issue and that judge you were citing was wrong....

Poor Richard Saunders said:

Justice Friedman’s decision runs athwart our prior rulings
in this case and misconstrues Executive Law § 63(12) and the case law that has
interpreted that statute. While he justly criticizes comments made by the Attorney
General about defendants when she was running for that office, he ignores that this
issue has already been considered, and rejected, by this Court.

[snip]
Defendants and Justice Friedman assert that the Attorney General exceeded her
powers and misused the Executive Law
[snip]
However, this Court has already ruled in Trump I that the facts of this case
warrant the application of Executive Law § 63(12), and that the Attorney General is
vindicating the public interest in challenging the transactions in question (see People v
Trump, 217 AD3d at 610).
Click to expand...
 
What was affirmed by the Superior Court Terry was that 'yes the charges and law broken that were cited were CORRECT', and yes AG James was right to bring that case.

They made it clear neither of those FACTS are in dispute.
 
But Terry reading the summaries of all the documents fraud crime cited above, with statutes and NO VICTIMS needed, do you still maintain there is no law in the US that can be used to charge documents fraud if there is no victim?
 
volsrocks said:
A New York state appeals court voided a more than $500 million civil fraud penalty imposed on President Donald Trump.


Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Arthur Engoron in February 2024 ordered Trump to pay around $454 million in total penalties after holding him liable for business fraud.

“Total victory in the sham NY Attorney General case!!! After 5 years of hell, justice prevailed!” wrote Eric Trump, who, with his brother Donald Trump Jr., operates the Trump Organization.




So up your ass Judge Engoron ...Trump wins again
Click to expand...
The award will be reduced, but the decision stands - trumpco is liable for fraud, tax-evasion, rape, etc.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Wrong. His opinion carries equal weight.
Click to expand...
LIE.

HIs statements were shown to be FACTUALLY INCORRECT as this issue was ruled upon and we have that RULING. His statements after the fact are not finding and just his opinions and a wrong one at that.


Poor Richard Saunders said:

Justice Friedman’s decision runs athwart our prior rulings
in this case and misconstrues Executive Law § 63(12) and the case law that has
interpreted that statute. While he justly criticizes comments made by the Attorney
General about defendants when she was running for that office, he ignores that this
issue has already been considered, and rejected, by this Court.

[snip]
Defendants and Justice Friedman assert that the Attorney General exceeded her
powers and misused the Executive Law
[snip]
However, this Court has already ruled in Trump I that the facts of this case
warrant the application of Executive Law § 63(12), and that the Attorney General is
vindicating the public interest in challenging the transactions in question (see People v
Trump, 217 AD3d at 610).
Click to expand...
 
T. A. Gardner said:
...
Click to expand...
QP! said:
But Terry reading the summaries of all the documents fraud crime cited above, with statutes and NO VICTIMS needed, do you still maintain there is no law in the US that can be used to charge documents fraud if there is no victim?
Click to expand...
Terry are you going to pretend you do not see that question and not answer so you can just tell the lie later that 'no victim equals no crime'??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top