Asked and answered. The order speaks for itself. Let others read it and try to square it with your mischaracterization of what Williams testimony was.

quote:

Originally posted by Lamar:

. . . and contributions going up by the hour.

Thanks Lamar. I have always wondered what sort of Neanderthals would respond to pleas for cash like the one yesterday at the courthouse. Glad it is folks like you parting with their hard earned bucks.

I don't see a lie; I see tap-dancing with the facts.

You do realize you're defending the submission of fraudulent applications, don't you?

Here is the Order. Note is is structured as I described.

Nothing else matters, but this.

I doubt Dr. Easter has read it by today.

[url=https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/trump-
decision.pdf]https://ag.ny.gov/sites/defaul...s/trump-decision.pdf[/url]

From the Order in its entirely
David Williams
David Williams has worked at Deutsche Bank for the past 17 years. TT 5324. He is currently a senior lender and team leader in the Private Wealth Management Division. TT 5324.
Williams testified that, generally, a payment default is more material than a covenant default, as it "speaks definitively to the repayment of the loan." TT 5337. Williams stated that he was not aware of any payment defaults on any of Donald Trump's loans with Deutsche Bank. TT 5339.
Williams corroborated the testimony of Nicholas Haigh that Deutsche Bank would apply a standard 50% haircut to the values of assets supplied by a client on an SFC, testifying that "it is - it is after we have made what I would say are generally our standard adjustments that we apply to really any given high-net-worth individual or ultra-high-net-worth individual's provided financial statements." TT 5374-5375, 5382-5384.
Williams confirmed that the numbers to which Deutsche Bank applied its standard haircut in evaluating the credit risk of the Trump loans came from Donald Trump's SFCs. PX 498; TT
5400-5403.
Williams testified that Donald Trump agreed to continue a guarantee requirement "in order to keep a more favorable pricing on the loans." TT 5406-5407, 5417-5419; PX 498.
In summer 2019, Deutsche Bank sent three different letters to Donald Trump, indicating that he was not in compliance with his Debt Service Coverage Ratio covenants under the Trump Chicago, Doral, and Old Post Office loans. PX 520, 521, 522. Williams confirmed that these notices were sent to Donald Trump because the covenant breaches could implicate the personal
JCalaiicc.
TT 5410-5415. Williams testified that there were two more breaches of the Old Post
Office and Trump Chicago loans in 2020. TT 5419-5420. Williams went on to detail that all three loans breached their debt service coverage requirements in 2021, resulting in Deutsche Bank commissioning appraisals on all three properties. TT 5424-5425; PX 561.
Williams confirmed that in July 2021, Deutsche Bank determined to "exit" the client relationship with Donald Trump, stating "we would be opting not to renew or extend that credit facility, and we would advise the client with some advance notice of that." TT 5425-5427; PX 561.
Williams further corroborated that as a lending officer, he would expect a client to provide truthful and accurate information to the bank, and that Donald Trump's net worth and personal guarantee were significant factors in Deutsche Bank's determining whether to underwrite a loan.
TT 5427-5428. Williams additionally confirmed his previous deposition testimony, in which he stated that had he determined that Donald Trump's net worth fell below $2.5 billion at any time, he would have recommended that the private wealth division declare an "event of default." TT
5429-5430.
22 of 92


This testimony does not any way match Dr. Easter’s characterization. In fact, it is the exact opposite. President Trump was not in compliance and breach.

The bank was not “happy.”

Dr. Easter can say what he wants and he’ll all he wants. His position is at best misleading. It is at worst a lie.

He has been presented w the facts. He counties to argue. He is not intentionally misleading. Round here we call that a liying.

You left out part where he testified that financial statements were considered estimates on the part of the submitter and the part where he testified that he saw nothing unusual, discrepancies noted, about the Trump statement in their business experience.

They don’t audit as they base their loan decision on other factors.

Engoron stipulated in his own words that the banks were “happy” but that did not mitigate the letter of the law.

The truth is that the bank was happy, profited, and satisfied by its arrangement with Trump. There was NO injured party here.

There is no part left out.

This the full factual findings of the Court concerning the testimony.

Again, the truth of the matter is the bank informed President Trunk numerous times he was in breach. That the bank expected honest assessment. That assessment affected its decision.

You are still lying.

The facts as determined by the judge in this order are not going to be overturned in this issue unless there is clear error. You have provided nothing that establishes clear error.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
You left out part where he testified that financial statements were considered estimates on the part of the submitter and the part where he testified that he saw nothing unusual, discrepancies noted, about the Trump statement in their business experience.

. . . simple enough, why don't you provide us the missing parts of the testimony . . .

Is it that painful to your political views to just tell the truth?

quote:

Williams speaks to Financial Statements:

They’re largely reliant on the use of estimates.

quote:

Williams speaking to the loan:

No payments were missed, and the loans were never found to be in default

quote:

Engoron speaking to the request for dismissal after Deutsche testimony:

the mere fact that lenders were happy doesn’t mean that the statute wasn’t violated.”

. . . you're an embarrassment.

The hypocrisy of some if not most GOPers is stunning. Best not to think about it too much, but when it's in your face, in many ways, so to speak -----

It's a safe bet, on behalf of truth, that if you take practically anything a hard-core GOPer says as either a lie, a projection, some spin/propaganda he is parroting from Fox or Trump, some truth will emerge.

The political persecution of Trump thing is a projection coming from a GOPer.

McCarthy once told the truth. To paraphrase - he said that the purpose of all those repeated Benghazi investigations was to harm HRC politically, and it worked. It wasn't about accountability at all. It never is with a GOPer. It's about winning the next election cycle.

The GOPer House is now involved in multiple "investigations", all about spinning, politics, not about accountability

They are fond of investigating the investigation or the investigator.

Right now they are "investigating" the 1/6 committee's investigation. The purpose, of course isn't about truth, but about spin and saving face.

It seems very, very obvious that GOPers are doing everything they can to thwart accountability for themselves, and especially for Trump. So, it is reasonable to presume that "accountability" is not their game plan.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...iden-mccarthy-jordan

The House GOP’s many, many investigations, explained
House Republicans are ready to investigate everything under the sun.

“I think accountability is the most important point, but first you’ve got to get the facts out,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise told Fox News about the need to investigate

“It’s a phony operation from beginning to end designed to further their partisan political interests,” Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly, a Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, told Vox.

Coming from you Mike…that is a compliment.

Suffice it to say the thought process is mutual.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
. . . you're an embarrassment.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Coming from you Mike…that is a compliment.

Suffice it to say the thought process is mutual.

There is no shame in the shameless. It's not a mutual thing.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...00dd7db7398503&ei=18

Biden invokes executive privilege to shield Robert Hur interview tapes from House
Story by Bart Jansen, USA TODAY • 22m • 4 min read

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...Wdp?ocid=socialshare

House Republicans urge DOJ to investigate Michael Cohen for lying to Congress

Rep. James Comer calls for accountability for Michael Cohen, saying he will have additional criminal referrals if necessary,

So how do you justify “the banks expect an honest evaluation” and the “50% haircut” (which while I get what it means but I’ve never heard that term in use in finance before) as it being “honest”?

Kind of says that neither side is expecting any honesty.

Once again, most people miss the whole point. The fact is, whether or not Trump is convicted, it won't make a damn bit of difference to his supporters. There is no evidence which would convince them of his guilt. Denial is at the core of their being. The Democrats, professional level deniers in their own right, refuse to accept this truth. They don't understand that they are simply providing the Trumpeteers with ammunition which will be used against them.
Ultimately, the Democrats will have accomplished nothing except the deepening and widening the gap between left and right. Hopefully, one day, enough free thinking people in the center will wake up to this and do something about it.
On the other hand, the debates should be a hoot. Two old men, neither of whom can string a complete sentence together, neither of whom would know the truth if it bit them in the ass, standing on the stage, and insulting each other.
One would hope that the American people, watching at home, might realize what a farce this has become and finally say "enough"! We deserve better! Probably won't happen though and we'll continue to get just what we have gotten used to. Regards, Bill.

quote:

Once again, most people miss the whole point.

The fact is, whether or not Trump is convicted, it won't make a damn bit of difference to his supporters. There is no evidence which would convince them of his guilt.

The Democrats, professional level deniers in their own right, refuse to accept this truth. They don't understand that they are simply providing the Trumpeteers with ammunition which will be used against them.
Ultimately, the Democrats will have accomplished nothing except the deepening and widening the gap between left and right.

I think that (perhaps) you too are missing the point(s).

Convincing them of his guilt is moot because they already know he's guilty, and it doesn't matter.

What democrats accept as truth is that the Rule of Law is doing the job it's supposed to do. It's a coincidence that the criminal prosecution is entwined with political. It can't be avoided in the situation with Trump. What some people think, you included, is that the political aspects of Trump's indictments ought to be held above the Rule of Law application like a shield.

Giving "ammunition" to Trump team and supporters is not a fault of democrats or the rule of law. "The fault, Dear Brutus is not in the stars, but in ourselves."

If the polarization gap is widened due to Trump prosecutions legitimately per the rule of law, just where does the fault lay in that?

And furthermore, if a large segment of society believes the legitimate application of the rule of law is corrupt, and they put a team in power, led by Trump, to fix it, Is that the fault of democrats for honoring the constitution, the Founders, the rule of law?

What do you expect - just not even try to hold Trump accountable?

quote:

If the polarization gap is widened due to Trump prosecutions legitimately per the rule of law, just where does the fault lay in that?

When solid Constitutionalists like Jonathan Turley, solid prosecutors like Andy McCarthy, and expert defense attorneys like Alan Dershowitz all stand up, agree, and shout that these cases have no strong legal basis and are only political hacks…

…the fault lies squarely at the feet of the Administration and the Democratic Party.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

If the polarization gap is widened due to Trump prosecutions legitimately per the rule of law, just where does the fault lay in that?

When solid Constitutionalists like Jonathan Turley, solid prosecutors like Andy McCarthy, and expert defense attorneys like Alan Dershowitz all stand up, agree, and shout that these cases have no strong legal basis and are only political hacks…

…the fault lies squarely at the feet of the Administration and the Democratic Party.

You're cherry-picking your experts again.

I do not think the case is “strong.” It is a very complicated matter. Cohen’s issues could sink the whole thing. The charges are misdemeanors to make a felony.

We have fair minded folks on here who keep getting it wrong that the charges are about paying a porn star. No, the charges are paying a porn star and fraudulently reporting the payments for a direct benefit to a campaign.

Legally, that is as diff as the Red Sea to a farm puddle.

Yet, that is the mental barrier faced by this jury.

Recently, I have seen folks advance a theory of jury nullification (which is mistrial if argued for directly) that assuming President Trump is guilty, is this important enough to deny him the right to run for president in effect w a conviction.

First, he has no right to be President.


Second, the stripping of liberty and civic rights that we all face when confronted w a felony conviction far out way, “Well, folks may not vote for him if we convict of this not very serious legal theory.”

No one, including myself, was sympathetic to HRC that a serious criminal probe cost her votes.

The jury will decide the facts of this case as applied to the law provided by courts. I will be satisfied in that subject to appellate review.

That is the way it should be.

There is a democratic in Manhattan state court on trial right now as well.

The Administration and the DNC have nothing to do w this prosecution. You have no evidence to support your declaration. That has never stopped you before.

quote:

I can advance you a loan for airfare if you are short.

Don't need airfare, but you could buy me a house there. The real estate market has been in the pits for decades, so you could get a good deal.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Once again, most people miss the whole point.

The fact is, whether or not Trump is convicted, it won't make a damn bit of difference to his supporters. There is no evidence which would convince them of his guilt.

The Democrats, professional level deniers in their own right, refuse to accept this truth. They don't understand that they are simply providing the Trumpeteers with ammunition which will be used against them.
Ultimately, the Democrats will have accomplished nothing except the deepening and widening the gap between left and right.

I think that (perhaps) you too are missing the point(s).

Convincing them of his guilt is moot because they already know he's guilty, and it doesn't matter.

What democrats accept as truth is that the Rule of Law is doing the job it's supposed to do. It's a coincidence that the criminal prosecution is entwined with political. It can't be avoided in the situation with Trump. What some people think, you included, is that the political aspects of Trump's indictments ought to be held above the Rule of Law application like a shield.

Giving "ammunition" to Trump team and supporters is not a fault of democrats or the rule of law. "The fault, Dear Brutus is not in the stars, but in ourselves."

If the polarization gap is widened due to Trump prosecutions legitimately per the rule of law, just where does the fault lay in that?

And furthermore, if a large segment of society believes the legitimate application of the rule of law is corrupt, and they put a team in power, led by Trump, to fix it, Is that the fault of democrats for honoring the constitution, the Founders, the rule of law?

What do you expect - just not even try to hold Trump accountable?

No, I don't miss the point. The point is that this application of the law is not being done out of any great reverence for justice or the rule of law; it is a political strategy, and a misguided one at that. The Democrats behind this are not prosecuting Trump because they are offended that he is a law breaker (and he almost certainly is), they are prosecuting Trump because they thought it would serve to take him out of the running. They misread the room, and the cost will be high. Just as Trump could have won in 2020, by simply keeping his mouth shut, the Democrats could easily win 2024, but not by further dividing the electorate. As in 2016, they are running a weak slate and a large segment of the population doesn't believe a thing they say. Not recognizing this is absolutely their fault. Regards, Bill.

Well, Regards Bill, I disagree with you on your main points.

IMO, to NOT prosecute Trump would be political, which is exactly what republicans would do.

Let's just agree to disagree and be nice.

Political ME!?!?!?

Here is political!

quote:

Congressman Mike Waltz from Florida and former US Army Colonel:

"This is a dark moment in American history. What I still can't get over, is seeing Joe Biden's number 3 official from the Department of Justice sitting right there next to the prosecutor just feet from President Trump who is leading Joe Biden in the polls."

How many Republican leaders in Congress have shown up? More than 3.

I would want someone there too, to report first hand as we run into November.

Of course, we done know the RNC is paying Trump’s legal bills.

Unlike these Republican Congressional leaders, this man does not run to make a press conference on the evil of President Trump every time they show up.

Trump's success is astonishing enough, as a fact - stand alone.

But when the big picture of it is assessed, assuming it can actually be seen, if not understood, it really does make me feel ill.

For many years Trump has succeeded in beating the system. Lately he has shown he can beat even the rule of law and the constitution itself.

If given real power -- it's unimaginable.

Think about it - Trump is beating the raps and the system with pure lies, spin and propaganda, and has plenty of help from the unsavory, such as Fox and the fascist fringe in congress.

Who would have thought that lies could be so powerful? (Hint - The Founders were the first to think that)

Just looking at the so-called "reporting" on the NY trial I see two dramatically opposing narratives, with Fox leading the way with the spin and propaganda.

When I watch the "reporting" I look for the presentation of facts and evidence which logically supports the conclusions inferred or stated.

I think that's what everyone should be doing.

Fox, for example is grossly deficient, lame, in facts and evidence, heavy in conclusions stated as fact in their narratives. People are vulnerable to that methodology, apparently by the millions

Take this quote from the above post for example, then multiply it with the MAGAhorn:

quote:
Congressman Mike Waltz from Florida and former US Army Colonel:

"This is a dark moment in American history. What I still can't get over, is seeing Joe Biden's number 3 official from the Department of Justice sitting right there next to the prosecutor just feet from President Trump who is leading Joe Biden in the polls."

I think the above quote is a classic example of the Appeal to Authority Fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Ask yourself - what facts are presented in support of the conclusions or inferences "dark moment"? My take-away is that yes indeed, but the flip side.

The only fact I see is the credentials of the authority appealed to who is just using unrelated supposed facts, inferring an opinion - perhaps injustice, corruption, persecution - all are very heavy insinuations. But people buy it, like Lane, who apparently can't critically think.

Is the next POTUS, with all the consequences of Trumpism, going to occupy the WH, dominate the justice system and congress, based on toxic Trump Soup?

The daily parade of fawning sycophant Republicans at the trial showing up to kiss Trump's ring is positively disgusting. You have to wonder about their individual sense of pride and self esteem to make such a shameful display of kowtowing. Embarrassing.

seems,according to CNN, Cohen had a little trouble yesterday

quote:

Originally posted by MLindsay:
seems,according to CNN, Cohen had a little trouble yesterday

Yes, what a surprise. trump's former lawyer has a history of lying, cheating and stealing. Birds of a feather.

So when Trump inevitably announces that he will not testify, what will his excuse be:

1. There is no need for me to testify since the evidence is compelling that I did nothing wrong.

2. There is no point in me testifying since the process is stacked against me and it is impossible for me to get a fair trial.

3. There is no way I can testify since I cannot stay awake long enough to hear a question and respond.

4. I am afraid to put my hand on a Bible and swear an oath to tell the truth because I may be struck by lightning.

quote:

4. I am afraid to put my hand on a Bible and swear an oath to tell the truth because I may be struck by lightning.

No need to even think about that one…Cohen already went.

Let us see how President Trump holds up under cross.

Of course, President Trump is under no obligation to make the state’s case for them.

It is his right not to testify. The court will instruct they his refusal to take the stand is not evidence of guilt.

. . . he was never going to testify despite his assertions to the contrary. The man cannot string together three sentences without lying. No way any lawyer ever allows him to go on the stand under oath.

at it's core, Cohen paid someone, and likely submitted an invoice(s) - As "legal" and "entertainment" expenses (used to?) have the same tax treatment, AND the "crimes" are expired misdemeanors, why is there a trial? Trump paid Cohen, NOT stormy - sure, it's a "technical" but literally everything is either TECHNICALLY legal or illegal --

things that make you go hmmmm

if you are reading this far, yes, i am stirring the pot, just for fun

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
So when Trump inevitably announces that he will not testify, what will his excuse be:

1. There is no need for me to testify since the evidence is compelling that I did nothing wrong.

2. There is no point in me testifying since the process is stacked against me and it is impossible for me to get a fair trial.

3. There is no way I can testify since I cannot stay awake long enough to hear a question and respond.

4. I am afraid to put my hand on a Bible and swear an oath to tell the truth because I may be struck by lightning.

5. all of the above!

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
at it's core, Cohen paid someone, and likely submitted an invoice(s) - As "legal" and "entertainment" expenses (used to?) have the same tax treatment, AND the "crimes" are expired misdemeanors, why is there a trial? Trump paid Cohen, NOT stormy - sure, it's a "technical" but literally everything is either TECHNICALLY legal or illegal --

things that make you go hmmmm

if you are reading this far, yes, i am stirring the pot, just for fun

Not sure, but I'd bet that someone from the trump organization made up the invoices. Also not sure how they got around the point of having Cohen having to declare it as income since he was just being reimbursed for a loan he had taken out.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Lamar:

. . . and contributions going up by the hour.

Thanks Lamar. I have always wondered what sort of Neanderthals would respond to pleas for cash like the one yesterday at the courthouse. Glad it is folks like you parting with their hard earned bucks.

if I had any maybe I'd buy a shirt or mug.
but since my 2020 dollars are only worth 60 cents I can't afford either of those.

Should have invested in the Biden stock market. Dow broke 40000 today and SP broke 5300. Up from 30900 and 3850 respectively when Trump left office. I could have told you that Trump sneakers weren’t gonna be the best investment options.

[And your math is a bit off on inflation. A dollar today only buys 82.542% of what it could buy back in 2020. Like I say, maybe you need to consider leaving financial planning to a professional.]

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Should have invested in the Biden stock market. Dow broke 40000 today and SP broke 5300. Up from 30900 and 3850 respectively when Trump left office. I could have told you that Trump sneakers weren’t gonna be the best investment options.

[And your math is a bit off on inflation. A dollar today only buys 82.542% of what it could buy back in 2020. Like I say, maybe you need to consider leaving financial planning to a professional.]

That 82.542% valuation doesn't even come close to what one sees at the grocery store (bought a can of Campbell's soup lately?), the hardware store, or the car dealership. The DOW broke 40,000 almost entirely due to devaluation, or inflation. Any increase in my net worth is all smoke and mirrors, but that's what Bidenomics is. Bill.

Somehow, I buy everything I want and need.