Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Analysing yesterday’s by-elections – politicalbetting.com

124»

Comments

  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,102
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    We have a ruling.

    Just not sure what's in it yet...

    $354.9 million and banned from running businesses in New York.

    I think I have just experienced a near sexual thrill at that news.
    It might make his supporters love him even more. Never assume that bad news is bad news for Trump.
    He’ll keep saying that everyone is out to get him, the court cases are politically motivated, and will appeal again.

    Unless he’s actually in prison, his vote numbers will hold up.

    Meanwhile, every businessman in New York now knows that courts will wreck your business if they decide they don’t like you.
    Yes, I despise Trump and I want him to lose, but this court case reeks. Driven by a lawyer who got elected on a promise to "get Trump"

    I know the American system is somewhat different to the UK's but it is still based in English Common Law. Imagine a London lawyer rising to judicial/prosecutorial power on a promise to "bring down Nigel Farage"

    WTF
    Comparing trump and Farage is incorrect. Farage may be many things, but he is nowhere near as venal as Trump.

    Thankfully we don't really have much of a comparison to Trump in this country.

    And the court case does not 'reek'; unless you think Trump is innocent of the charges?
    The premise behind the case is that Trump is a serial liar (true) who (and this is the tricky bit) continually mislead some poor innocent bankers into believing that he was much richer than he claimed, that his properties were worth much more than they were and thus got highly favourable lending opportunities which allowed him to make money , whilst further misleading the State of New York about the value of these same properties, thus reducing his taxes.

    We are talking about a guy whose businesses have utilised Chapter 11 no less than 6 times. The merest trace of due diligence would have disclosed many other dodgy schemes, such as his University. Any banker who dealt with him who thought that they could rely on Trump’s word as to compliance with his covenants was foolish in the extreme.

    Did these self serving certifications amount in a course of fraudulent conduct? Probably. Were banks and other institutions actually misled? Surely not. Even Deutsch Bank are not that stupid.
    It’s possible that NY State were conned out of some taxes in which case they should sue. The current proceedings do seem to me to be partisan, politically motivated and ill judged. I can’t see this nonsense surviving appeal.
    So your defence is (to summarise) "They were smart enough to know he was cheating them so it's their fault really. Plus they're probably Democrats"

    If I am ever arrested for a crime of which I was guilty, I will come to you and throw money at you to get me off.
This discussion has been closed.