ADVERTISEMENT

Civil Suit?

How do you Dems feel? After 3 years of Mueller generating absolutely nothing against Trump. And now 3 years of the NY DA investigating Trump and she files exactly ZERO charges against Trump? The fact she filed a civil suit is pretty telling in regards to the evidence she has, is it not? Basically admits that she can't prove that he did any of this, only that she can frame the narrative to a likely left-leaning jury (based on NY demographics) that its 'more likely than not'. She even accused him of fraud in her press release, yet chose to not file one single criminal charge against him.
They really really really do not want Trump to run again. Looks kind of desperate what with them garnering 81 million votes last time.
 
Last edited:
So the taxing jurisdictions aren't victimized by his understating asset values?
I don't know about New York but in Oklahoma I don't get to dictate my properties valuations.

Just like banks do their own valuations, it's really irrelevant what the borrower values something.

Trump actually has disclaimers on his valuations telling the lenders it is their responsibility to verify the information.

This entire case is nothing but another Democrat wet dream to try and take down Trump.
 
Last edited:
I don't know about New York but it in Oklahoma I don't get to dictate my properties valuations.

Just like banks do their own valuations, it's really irrelevant what the borrower values something.

Trump actually has disclaimers on his valuations telling the lenders they are responsibility to verify the information.

This entire case is nothing but another Democrat wet dream to try and take down Trump.
David's running the cause. 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Ya know, when Bill Barr goes on live tv and says it's a political witch hunt, the bitch ain't got nuthin'.
Is that what he said? I saw a clip where he felt the 40+ year old children were unjustly included, but that is all I heard.
 
🤣🤣🤣
We got him now!

200.gif
Need to photo shop an orange wig on that fish. Still funny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OUSOONER67
... Trump actually has disclaimers on his valuations telling the lenders it is their responsibility to verify the information.

This entire case is nothing but another Democrat wet dream to try and take down Trump.
Should be easy peasy then to get it dismissed.
 
Should be easy peasy then to get it dismissed.
With honest people in charge I'd agree with you but the NY Attorney General based her entire campaign on getting Trump.

She'll do or say anything to further her quest. She is desperate.

Where are the victims of this Trump family criminal enterprise? Who are they?
 
With honest people in charge I'd agree with you but the NY Attorney General based her entire campaign on getting Trump.

She'll do or say anything to further her quest. She is desperate.

Where are the victims of this Trump family criminal enterprise? Who are they?
This is serving of biscuits and gravy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Sad. Yours would have been the one spin I would have been interested in reading. I'm struggling to see how this isn't a big win for Trump given the media narrative about what could be coming from the NY DA over the past several months.
I mean if you want to view a civil fraud enforcement suit for a quarter of a billion dollars as a “big win” for Trump, far be it from me to attempt to disavow you of that thought.

I’ll just laugh at the ludicrousness of it instead.
 
I mean if you want to view a civil fraud enforcement suit for a quarter of a billion dollars as a “big win” for Trump, far be it from me to attempt to disavow you of that thought.

I’ll just laugh at the ludicrousness of it instead.
Who did the Trump Family defraud? Latitia James is a joke.
 
Taxpayers. Borrowers. Shareholders of the banks he defrauded. Small businesses he defrauded. Etc.
nine elements needed to establish fraud: (1) a representation of fact; (2) its falsity; (3) its materiality; (4) the representer’s knowledge of its falsity or ignorance of its truth; (5) the representer’s intent that it should be acted upon by the person in the manner reasonably contemplated; (6) the injured party’s ignorance of its falsity; (7) the injured party’s reliance on its truth; (8) the injured party’s right to rely thereon; and (9) the injured party’s consequent and proximate injury.


Even if there was lying, #9 doesn't seem to be met for most of those persons, and 5, 7 and 8 are not met for tax authorities.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT