That is my comment on this whole case. I am in lending, and if the bank is relying on some information, they are going to verify it. My system calculates net worth, but we don’t look at that at all so if somebody tells us their dilapidated, two bedroom bungalow in the middle of nowhere Kansas is worth $500,000, we don’t rely on that, and it doesn’t matter so we weren’t defrauded by that “inflated” value estimate. and if you look on Zillow, you can clearly tell the judge is greatly undervalued the property for the case. Saing MarALago is worth $24 million with a property right up the street that’s half the size is valued at $50 million clearly shows the judge doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
If anything that proves it's not fraud. A Bank isn't going to lend $100,000,000 on an asset only worth $10,000,000. They do their own independent investigation on a properties worth as the property would be the collateral on the loan. Who would know more about a properties worth? The Bank who would quickly go out of business by lending money on overinflated property or a Dem Prosecutor who ran for her office with the promise of "getting Trump"?
I guess the only "victim" was the bank taking on more risk than they thought they were. Or receiving less in interest payments.
That is my comment on this whole case. I am in lending, and if the bank is relying on some information, they are going to verify it. My system calculates net worth, but we don’t look at that at all so if somebody tells us their dilapidated, two bedroom bungalow in the middle of nowhere Kansas is worth $500,000, we don’t rely on that, and it doesn’t matter so we weren’t defrauded by that “inflated” value estimate. and if you look on Zillow, you can clearly tell the judge is greatly undervalued the property for the case. Saing MarALago is worth $24 million with a property right up the street that’s half the size is valued at $50 million clearly shows the judge doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
If anything that proves it's not fraud. A Bank isn't going to lend $100,000,000 on an asset only worth $10,000,000. They do their own independent investigation on a properties worth as the property would be the collateral on the loan. Who would know more about a properties worth? The Bank who would quickly go out of business by lending money on overinflated property or a Dem Prosecutor who ran for her office with the promise of "getting Trump"?
There are too many laws that protect banks, I agree with that.