Submitting fraudulent real estate prices in order to gain a larger loan from a lender is fraud.
Someone paying above listing price for your home is not fraud. Have you guys never seen a bidding war on a property? Remember how during the pandemic, people were paying stupid money, way above asking price for houses? People overpay for real estate all the time, and for some really stupid reasons sometimes. Some people will overpay just because the previous owner was famous or an idol of theirs. As long as the new buyers weren't given fraudulent information about the property (square footage, for example), then them choosing to overpay for a property is not fraud.
Before people get butt hurt about my post, let me clarify that I don't believe President Trump is guilty of anything. First of all, he has real estate lawyers and tax attorneys doing his loan papers and doing his taxes. If anyone did anything illegal, it was them. Second, what President Trump is accused of is what pretty much every large commercial real estate developer does, to one extent or other. They're simply singling President Trump out because of who he is.
Now, having said that, people really need to work on that whole "research" part of being an elite research board.
What Trump was prosecuted for was basically using two sets of books for the same property, depending on who that information was being given to. For example, when information was given to a lender for a loan, an apartment building would be said to have a high rate of occupancy, the square footage of the apartments would be increased, and the rent rates would be increased. That way he could get a higher loan.
But when information would be given to tax authorities, for the very same building, the occupancy rate would be lower, the rents would be lower, the square footage of the apartments would be lower. That way he could pay lower taxes.
THAT is what makes it fraud. Knowingly giving loan officers or tax accessors information that is not true in order to benefit from it. (Again, not saying Trump is guilty of anything. I personally couldn't care less if he never paid a penny in taxes in his life.)
But people need to understand the basics of what they're talking about. Especially if they're going to try to be redpilling anyone. Please don't make the entire group look ignorant.
Some of these posts are just mind bogglingly dumb sometimes.
None of that had ever been said that I have read. All that has been mentioned is the value of the properties. “Mar-A-Lago is worth $18 million and Trump said it was worth more.” And if a bank is relying on provided information, they would verify it. A bank doesn’t hand over millions of dollars based on what a borrower guesses their assets are valued at.
What? That's what the entire case was about, the discrepancy between property values given to lenders vs tax authorities.
I don't know what, or how much you've been reading, but it's obviously not very much.
Here's an article that uses financial statements gathered through the FOIA to show the difference between numbers given for the same property to different officials.
I don’t know why some people on here can’t just have an intelligent conversation without lobbing insults. I could easily do the same, but I won’t.
The article you provided doesn’t relate to the case at all. (Well, one sentence does.) Your article is an independent investigation by some group and they outlined all the things they found on the documents that they think is fraud. But in the whole thing, it only once mentions the trial we are talking about. And in the sentence, it mentions just the concern of inflating and deflating assets. Not overreporting or underreporting vacancy rates, rent rolls, or any of that. So your article further makes my point.
Here is the summary of the case, directly from the NY AG office. You’ll notice the only “crime” it mentions, including what Peek-A-Boo herself directly says, is about inflating the value of assets.
Might I make the friendly suggestion that in the future, instead of focusing on the volume of articles you read, you focus more on reading comprehension to better understand what you are reading.
The article you provided doesn’t relate to the case at all.
Part of being well informed about something in the news is reading a wide variety of articles over the time period things are developing. If you keep up with news as it happens, it's easier to see how all the puzzle pieces fit together than it is to go back years later and then try to figure out what was going on.
So, if you had been paying attention to things as they were happening, you would see that this article was written after rumors and allegations of Trump committing real estate/tax fraud were wide spread. This article is the next logical step in the process of how news works. Investigating the allegations made. In large part to investigative journalism like this, the DA is made aware of possible crimes and uses that info (along with a ton of other stuff) to help determine if the DA's office should investigate it themselves. Lawsuits aren't just magically conjured for no reason from thin air.
So that is how this article relates to the case. It's one of the reasons the case even exists. It's absolutely exhausting having to spoon feed this stuff to people.
And in the sentence, it mentions just the concern of inflating and deflating assets. Not overreporting or underreporting vacancy rates, rent rolls, or any of that.
When they talk about inflating and deflating assets, who do you think those numbers are for? Where do you believe they got those numbers? How do you think they determine those numbers?
The article plainly says that they got this information from FOIA acts from forms/paperwork Trump's people gave to loan officers and forms/paperwork they gave to tax authorities.
The paperwork/forms that they're giving people are where you'll find the information on vacancy rates, rents rolls, and property information. That is how they determine the value of assets. How much people are paying to rent an apartment, if anyone is renting the apartment at all, and how large the apartment is has quite a bit to do with determining how much that apartment is worth. See how that works?
I'm not sure why you think this needs to be spelled out specifically in the article. In all the conversations I've had about this, and involving this article (and I've had many), this is the first time someone has not understood the basics of how the value of assets for commercial rental property is determined.
But it is absolutely precious that you're criticizing my reading comprehension here. Ironic, as well.
I was surprised to see it on the NYPost. At least the top comment here is pointing out how it's not fraud, even if it's still pivoting to another theory without any evidence.
This comment should be stickied even if a bit harsh.
You can't be serious, a bidding war?? I sold my house 3 years ago, 30k over listing price. If they had offered me 6 million do you think I would take it? Of course not!
It would be painfully obvious some kind of fraud was afoot.
Ok, well, guess you just proved me wrong about how someone choosing to pay more than the seller is asking is fraud.
You should start calling around to all the DAs around the country telling them about the millions and millions of potential fraud cases they need to prosecute.
You're going to be famous for cracking this conspiracy. Congratulations!
🙄
Also, do you know what a Strawman argument is? If not, you should look it up. It might help you in the future when you're trying to prove someone wrong about something.
Ok, so now your just flat lying? I never said that paying more than asking price is fraud, and you know that. However, I believe you know how bidding wars work. But, since you may not, I will give you a break down.
Someone goes and looks at a house for lets say 465k. They really like the house and would want to live there. The house is listed fairly, but it is a sellers market. Your RA tells you they will get several bids on the house, so you decide to go as high in your range as you can. To win the bid, you go over by 7 or 8 %. What you don't do, if it is on the up and up, is offer 5 or 6 million for the property. If you had that kind of money to spend, you would be house hunting in a totally different neighborhood.
Bottom line, your analogy that someone overpaid by that much is simply a bidding war, is simply dumb. Most of us no longer buy these stupid cover stories.
I wasn't saying that what was going on with Jon Stewart's situation was a bidding war. I brought up bidding wars on properties because it's something that happens regularly, many people are familiar with them, and is an example of when someone pays more than asking price for a property. It was an example to show that just paying above asking price is not fraudulent.
Remember when I said you should look up what a Strawman Argument is? This is why.
The original argument was that Jon Stewart received more for his house than he was asking for, and that was fraud.
When it's pointed out that no, it's not fraud to receive more than asking price for a property, you (along with others) are now stating or implying (with zero evidence) that Jon Stewart committed fraud by cooking up some scheme to get someone to pay too much so then they both benefit financially.
That's a Strawman argument. And it's simply just wrong.
People pay stupid prices for things all the time. Doesn't mean it's illegal. Super wealthy people tend to have different outlooks on things than the rest of us, so judging what they do by our own values just doesn't work.
I'd also look into how accurate the information is in this post about how much Stewart actually listed the apartment for, and how much was paid. The information provided here hasn't been all that confidence inspiring, and I wouldn't take it for granted that any of those numbers are right.
🤦♀️
Submitting fraudulent real estate prices in order to gain a larger loan from a lender is fraud.
Someone paying above listing price for your home is not fraud. Have you guys never seen a bidding war on a property? Remember how during the pandemic, people were paying stupid money, way above asking price for houses? People overpay for real estate all the time, and for some really stupid reasons sometimes. Some people will overpay just because the previous owner was famous or an idol of theirs. As long as the new buyers weren't given fraudulent information about the property (square footage, for example), then them choosing to overpay for a property is not fraud.
Before people get butt hurt about my post, let me clarify that I don't believe President Trump is guilty of anything. First of all, he has real estate lawyers and tax attorneys doing his loan papers and doing his taxes. If anyone did anything illegal, it was them. Second, what President Trump is accused of is what pretty much every large commercial real estate developer does, to one extent or other. They're simply singling President Trump out because of who he is.
Now, having said that, people really need to work on that whole "research" part of being an elite research board.
What Trump was prosecuted for was basically using two sets of books for the same property, depending on who that information was being given to. For example, when information was given to a lender for a loan, an apartment building would be said to have a high rate of occupancy, the square footage of the apartments would be increased, and the rent rates would be increased. That way he could get a higher loan.
But when information would be given to tax authorities, for the very same building, the occupancy rate would be lower, the rents would be lower, the square footage of the apartments would be lower. That way he could pay lower taxes.
THAT is what makes it fraud. Knowingly giving loan officers or tax accessors information that is not true in order to benefit from it. (Again, not saying Trump is guilty of anything. I personally couldn't care less if he never paid a penny in taxes in his life.)
But people need to understand the basics of what they're talking about. Especially if they're going to try to be redpilling anyone. Please don't make the entire group look ignorant.
Some of these posts are just mind bogglingly dumb sometimes.
None of that had ever been said that I have read. All that has been mentioned is the value of the properties. “Mar-A-Lago is worth $18 million and Trump said it was worth more.” And if a bank is relying on provided information, they would verify it. A bank doesn’t hand over millions of dollars based on what a borrower guesses their assets are valued at.
What? That's what the entire case was about, the discrepancy between property values given to lenders vs tax authorities.
I don't know what, or how much you've been reading, but it's obviously not very much.
Here's an article that uses financial statements gathered through the FOIA to show the difference between numbers given for the same property to different officials.
https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-inc-podcast-never-before-seen-trump-tax-documents-show-major-inconsistencies
I don’t know why some people on here can’t just have an intelligent conversation without lobbing insults. I could easily do the same, but I won’t.
The article you provided doesn’t relate to the case at all. (Well, one sentence does.) Your article is an independent investigation by some group and they outlined all the things they found on the documents that they think is fraud. But in the whole thing, it only once mentions the trial we are talking about. And in the sentence, it mentions just the concern of inflating and deflating assets. Not overreporting or underreporting vacancy rates, rent rolls, or any of that. So your article further makes my point.
Here is the summary of the case, directly from the NY AG office. You’ll notice the only “crime” it mentions, including what Peek-A-Boo herself directly says, is about inflating the value of assets.
https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2024/attorney-general-james-wins-landmark-victory-case-against-donald-trump
Might I make the friendly suggestion that in the future, instead of focusing on the volume of articles you read, you focus more on reading comprehension to better understand what you are reading.
Part of being well informed about something in the news is reading a wide variety of articles over the time period things are developing. If you keep up with news as it happens, it's easier to see how all the puzzle pieces fit together than it is to go back years later and then try to figure out what was going on.
So, if you had been paying attention to things as they were happening, you would see that this article was written after rumors and allegations of Trump committing real estate/tax fraud were wide spread. This article is the next logical step in the process of how news works. Investigating the allegations made. In large part to investigative journalism like this, the DA is made aware of possible crimes and uses that info (along with a ton of other stuff) to help determine if the DA's office should investigate it themselves. Lawsuits aren't just magically conjured for no reason from thin air.
So that is how this article relates to the case. It's one of the reasons the case even exists. It's absolutely exhausting having to spoon feed this stuff to people.
When they talk about inflating and deflating assets, who do you think those numbers are for? Where do you believe they got those numbers? How do you think they determine those numbers?
The article plainly says that they got this information from FOIA acts from forms/paperwork Trump's people gave to loan officers and forms/paperwork they gave to tax authorities.
The paperwork/forms that they're giving people are where you'll find the information on vacancy rates, rents rolls, and property information. That is how they determine the value of assets. How much people are paying to rent an apartment, if anyone is renting the apartment at all, and how large the apartment is has quite a bit to do with determining how much that apartment is worth. See how that works?
I'm not sure why you think this needs to be spelled out specifically in the article. In all the conversations I've had about this, and involving this article (and I've had many), this is the first time someone has not understood the basics of how the value of assets for commercial rental property is determined.
But it is absolutely precious that you're criticizing my reading comprehension here. Ironic, as well.
I was surprised to see it on the NYPost. At least the top comment here is pointing out how it's not fraud, even if it's still pivoting to another theory without any evidence.
This comment should be stickied even if a bit harsh.
Agreed. Stickied and everything. Nobody fucking reads anymore and we look ACTUALLY retarded.
You have no idea how refreshing it is to know that I'm not the only one seeing this or be bothered by this.
You can't be serious, a bidding war?? I sold my house 3 years ago, 30k over listing price. If they had offered me 6 million do you think I would take it? Of course not! It would be painfully obvious some kind of fraud was afoot.
Ok, well, guess you just proved me wrong about how someone choosing to pay more than the seller is asking is fraud.
You should start calling around to all the DAs around the country telling them about the millions and millions of potential fraud cases they need to prosecute.
You're going to be famous for cracking this conspiracy. Congratulations!
🙄
Also, do you know what a Strawman argument is? If not, you should look it up. It might help you in the future when you're trying to prove someone wrong about something.
Ok, so now your just flat lying? I never said that paying more than asking price is fraud, and you know that. However, I believe you know how bidding wars work. But, since you may not, I will give you a break down.
Someone goes and looks at a house for lets say 465k. They really like the house and would want to live there. The house is listed fairly, but it is a sellers market. Your RA tells you they will get several bids on the house, so you decide to go as high in your range as you can. To win the bid, you go over by 7 or 8 %. What you don't do, if it is on the up and up, is offer 5 or 6 million for the property. If you had that kind of money to spend, you would be house hunting in a totally different neighborhood.
Bottom line, your analogy that someone overpaid by that much is simply a bidding war, is simply dumb. Most of us no longer buy these stupid cover stories.
I wasn't saying that what was going on with Jon Stewart's situation was a bidding war. I brought up bidding wars on properties because it's something that happens regularly, many people are familiar with them, and is an example of when someone pays more than asking price for a property. It was an example to show that just paying above asking price is not fraudulent.
Remember when I said you should look up what a Strawman Argument is? This is why.
The original argument was that Jon Stewart received more for his house than he was asking for, and that was fraud.
When it's pointed out that no, it's not fraud to receive more than asking price for a property, you (along with others) are now stating or implying (with zero evidence) that Jon Stewart committed fraud by cooking up some scheme to get someone to pay too much so then they both benefit financially.
That's a Strawman argument. And it's simply just wrong.
People pay stupid prices for things all the time. Doesn't mean it's illegal. Super wealthy people tend to have different outlooks on things than the rest of us, so judging what they do by our own values just doesn't work.
I'd also look into how accurate the information is in this post about how much Stewart actually listed the apartment for, and how much was paid. The information provided here hasn't been all that confidence inspiring, and I wouldn't take it for granted that any of those numbers are right.