Interesting bit of trivia.
In 1981 Mar-A-Lago sold for $20,000,000. Somehow Mar-A-Lago has been decreed by a judge in NY to have magically been exempted from normal property appreciation and is worth $18,000,000. This is amazing. The historical rate of appreciation is 4% per year, across the US. I'm not much of a math person, but it seems reasonable to conclude that based on the average, that Mar-A-Lago would be worth over over $30,000,000 after 10 years, and that the worth would likely continue to grow. It's completely reasonable to conclude that it would be worth $70,000,000 today. This figure doesn't take into account any improvements that might have been done since 1981, or the fact that a beachfront property like this would likely appreciate more than 4% per year.
Just one more example of how the judge in Trump's fraud trial, ignored actual evidence and just made shit up.
It looks like the Trump team had a win today with a continuance that'll push one trial back past the elections. Not to mention the GA case circling the toilet due to prosecutorial misconduct.
It is looking like the strategy to convict Trump of something before the election might not be working.
IF I was Trump and IF I won in November, the first thing I would do is pardon myself from everything.
16 comments:
Wow. Way to find another awful conspiracy afoot! Man, there are a LOT of people involved in this conspiracy to bring down an innocent, good man! It's almost unbelievable, right?
Dan
"Wow. Way to find another awful conspiracy afoot! Man, there are a LOT of people involved in this conspiracy to bring down an innocent, good man! It's almost unbelievable, right?"
Wow, way to take what I actually said and blow it completely out of proportion. I'm not at all saying that Trump is an "innocent, good man!", I am saying that he carries the presumption of innocence into these trials, deserves the entirety of due process, deserves a fair trial, and the ability to put on a the best defense possible.
In the case of the judge in the NY fraud trial arbitrarily valuing Mar-A-Lago at an absurdly low number, it's either incompetence or bias that would lead him to do so. Especially valuing it lower that it sold for in 1981.
In the case of the GA trial, Trump deserves to not be the target of prosecutorial misconduct. It's likely/possible that this misconduct will allow him to get off even if there was proof that he'd broken some law.
Finally, with the rescheduling of the trial date at this point we don't have a lot of details, but per USA Today, rescheduling this trial will negatively affect other trials.
I apologize of pointing out facts, and drawing conclusions from those facts bothers you so. No matter how evil you perceive Trump to be, he deserves the same protections as anyone else in the justice system.
And yes, I do believe that at least some of these cases are politically motivated.
To be clear, one of the major factor in the "fraud" case (when no one was actually defrauded or damaged in way way, a literal victimless crime) was the valuation of real property that Trump used as collateral for loans. If the judge arbitrarily assigns a valuation that grossly underestimates the correct valuation retroactively, then he's literally making up evidence out of this air. Are you really suggesting that judges should be able to make up evidence out of thin air?
The reason why this makes a difference is that if Trump pledged collateral that he valued at $75,000,000, and the bank's due diligence confirmed that value, then by arbitrarily slashing that appraised value to a fraction of reality, the judge essentially creates "fraud" out of thin air.
But hey, it's Trump, who cares, right?
"Literal victimless crime"
Each time the rich get away once again with actions that would land the poor in trouble, it's another crime against us all.
Hardly victimless.
Dan
"Each time the rich get away once again with actions that would land the poor in trouble, it's another crime against us all."
So what happens when the "poor" get away with crimes that would put anyone else in jail?
"Hardly victimless."
In this case the "victim" testified that not only were they not victimized, nor were they defrauded, nor were they angry, and that they were prepared to do business with Trump again. So please, with all of your magical powers, identify a specific victim and quantify how they were specifically harmed by this particular business transaction.
In this case the "fraud" alleged is purely theoretical. Again, by all means let's allow the judge to manufacture evidence out of thin air because Trump is rich.
Screw equal justice under the law, screw the Biblical call for impartiality.
Screw the rich.
Please identify specifically what law of the state of NY was broken by this "fraud"?
Craig...
"Screw the rich."
NOW you're starting to sound more biblical, more Christ-like.
Still, I think Jesus, Mary and James said it better...
"Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you.
Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes.
Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days.
Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty.
You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.
You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you... (!!)"
"God has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts; God has brought down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of humble estate;
God has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty."
"Woe to you who are rich!"
Day-um!
Dan
As those of Dan's ilk have suggested, Trump defrauded the state which could have netted more tax revenues. But that's absolutely true of every real estate deal where prices were negotiated between buyer and seller and lender which impacted values and potential tax revenues. It would seem that value is a matter of what price is that which is agreed upon by all parties involved, and tax revenues follow. Tax revenues, in other words, don't dictate a damned thing in the process. But that's how Trump-haters roll.
I would also say that based on what I've seen of these various attempts to convict Trump of something, there's an incredible amount of fiction, invention and distortion of law to get to a conviction. It's really just a matter of the honesty of the plaintiffs, judges and juries, and so far, we're seeing precious little of that.
"NOW you're starting to sound more biblical, more Christ-like."
No, that sounded more like you. I'm sticking with the Biblical principle of not showing partiality based on ones economic status. I also don't base my hatreds on out of context, cherry picked, proof texts.
Still, I think Jesus, Mary and James said it better...
"Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you.
Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes.
Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days.
Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty.
You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.
You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you... (!!)"
"God has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts; God has brought down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of humble estate;
God has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty."
"Woe to you who are rich!"
Of course, Dan is rich, yet he chooses not to follow the scripture he proof texts.
I'll simply note that Dan's inability to answer the questions about Trump's alleged fraud, what laws were broken, and who specifically was victimized demonstrates that he's more concerned with pushing a narrative or two, than in what's really happening.
Not only that but he seems pretty proud of himself.
Art,
I made that point earlier when I said that that this was theoretical fraud, not real fraud.
It seems like where the state/judge are having problems is not understanding that assessed tax value is not the same as or necessarily related to actual value or loan value. They've arbitrarily, retroactively decided that Trump could/should have owed more taxes and that they're going to pull a number out of thin air. This is a gross misuse of the power of the state to tax and of the legal system. If the state didn't bill him for the tax owed at the time, they should not be able to come back for a second bite of the apple later.
What's interesting is that Dan and his ilk believe that Trump "losing" a civil case will get him out of the race as they don't seem to understand that this is not criminal.
Once that GA case falls apart due to prosecutorial misconduct, Trump appears to be free from any legal issues between now and the election. Both of the appeals will take years, and the chances of getting the one criminal trial back on the schedule before the election aren't good.
But it is amazing to see folx who prate on about justice, advocate injustice to a selected few.
Dan pretends his cherry-picked verses aren't speaking to specific corrupt wealthy of the time, and prefers to imply in refers to the wealthy in general, particularly the wealthy of today. Even more specifically, he applies it to Trump as if he has any evidence of Trump having used his wealth to oppress innocent people, as has say, his fellow leftist, George Soros. Dan's only concern is that everybody hate Trump as much as Dan hates Trump, for reasons he can't support with evidence. Dan defends and enables criminals and the morally corrupt, while attacking a president who was far superior than those he has supported and continues to support. It's just another case of Dan inflating the flaws of those he hates, so as to stoke agreement in the stupid, while minimizing the sins of those as perverse as he.
If one were to evaluate Dan's feeling about "the rich" based on who he spends the most time talking about, it would be reasonable to conclude that Trump is one of the very few of "the rich" that Dan despises. The fact that someone like Soros or Gates uses their billions much more insidiously than trump does, to make huge political changes from behind the scenes, yet get no attention from Dan is indeed strange.
Now, he'll say that he really means "all the rich", yet his silence on anyone but Trump tells us a different story.
OR, he'll say something along the lines of "Soros and Gates aren't president" or something equally weak.
A bit of context of the federal trial that was rescheduled. It now sounds like it was rescheduled because of the vast amount of discovery materials that needed to be read and prepared. The amount was so large that setting the trial date in March was probably absurd to begin with. Which raises the question of whether or not the trial date was set the day before super Tuesday intentionally to interfere with Trump's campaign. I think that anyone who reaches the level of a federal judge has to have some level of intelligence, certainly enough to know the effect of starting a trial the day before one of the biggest primary days in the cycle, and to be able to figure out that the date was unrealistic in the first place.
Post a Comment