New York State AG Leticia James has filed a civil fraud lawsuit against Trump

Yes. Weisselberg is a key player in this case as he's named in the suit but he's not the end all of it. He does provide key evidence of Trump Organization fraud. This jurisdiction question isn't even a strawman as you can have multiple cases in multiple jurisidctions and civil and criminal charges over the same incident and figues. For example. Derek Chauvin was guilty of murder of George Floyd. The city of Minneapollis settled a civil suit with the family of George Floyd over that same incident. The other officers are facing Federal charges over the murder of George Floyd. Now Derek Chauvin wasn't on trial in Thomas Lane's federal trial but he certainly was relevant to that trial and Chauvin's conviction in Minnesota court certainly made a difference to Lane pleading guilty in Federal court.

 

For example... he 'cooked the books' at Trump's direction.

Ok...I am now done. You keep asking questions and spending time when you can simply read the complaint and get many answers to your questions.

 

I finally woke up and realized you didn't read the charges either. You eager to point out Weisselberg's name. That's an easy search.

You're not as bad as @FranchiseBlade who didn't read and is talking **** to me about not reading it

 

Nobody is as bad as @FranchiseBlade!

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/letiti...ork-real-estate-11663883532?mod=hp_opin_pos_1

Letitia James vs. the Trump Family
New York’s AG found her defendants first, then looked for evidence to charge them with something.
By The Editorial Board
Sept. 22, 2022 6:43 pm ET

Common wisdom says that on a good day state attorneys general do 70% politics and 30% law. That’s on a good day. On Wednesday New York Attorney General Letitia James lived up to that reputation by filing a civil lawsuit against Donald Trump. The suit alleges that the former President and three of his children inflated the asset values and net worth of their properties to get better terms from banks on loans and better deals from insurers.

Ms. James ran for office promising to indict Mr. Trump, which is the opposite of the way justice should be done. You’re supposed to find a crime and then identify the perpetrator. Ms. James declared Mr. Trump could “be indicted for criminal offenses” and has hunted ever since for a crime to charge him with.

Her civil lawsuit requires a mere preponderance of evidence standard to prove guilt, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. She has referred the case to the Internal Revenue Service and federal prosecutors in Manhattan, though the Manhattan district attorney didn’t file charges after examining the same issues.

This isn’t to dismiss the financial fraud charges. The lawsuit says Mr. Trump used “objectively false numbers to calculate property values,” including counting his Trump Tower apartment at 30,000 sq. ft. when it was 10,996 sq. ft. so that it could be improperly valued at $327 million. His golf course in Scotland was valued at $327 million on the calculation that 2,500 homes could be developed (worth $267 million) when he had zoning approval for only 1,500 homes and apartments.

“All told, Mr. Trump, the Trump Organization, and the other Defendants, as part of a repeated pattern and common scheme, derived more than 200 false and misleading valuations of assets,” the lawsuit says.

No one who has ever listened to Mr. Trump will be surprised if he hyped the value of his holdings in dealing with bankers. But then no one in New York finance would ever trust only what Mr. Trump claims before signing a document or lending him money.

As far as we’ve seen, the lenders don’t seem to consider themselves victims. They made money on the loans, which didn’t default. The transactions were presumably scoured by auditors and bank due-diligence officers. There is enormous variability in real-estate valuations. The question Ms. James will have to prove is whether Mr. Trump’s claims amounted to intentional fraud.

The scent of politics can be detected in the sanctions Ms. James is seeking. She wrapped the three adult Trump children into the suit and is seeking to bar them for life from being officers of any business in New York. Mr. Trump would be barred from entering into any commercial real-estate acquisitions in New York state for five years and also barred from applying for loans from “any financial institution chartered by or registered with the New York Department of Financial Services” for five years.

She is also seeking $250 million in restitution, which probably exceeds the interest earned on the difference in interest rates that banks might have charged Mr. Trump if his assets were worth less than advertised.

Ms. James’s decision to drop this lawsuit only a few weeks before the midterm election also smacks of political motivation. Mr. Trump isn’t on any ballot. But she knows Mr. Trump drives Democrats to vote, and keeping him at the center of the news is a Democratic priority.

Mr. Trump has made a business and political career of getting away with whatever he can, and it’s easy to imagine he crossed a line. But the Democrats pursuing him have become Captain Ahabs bent on taking him down by any means necessary. Ms. James is a partisan prosecutor, and her charges and evidence need to be examined in that context.

Appeared in the September 23, 2022, print edition as 'Letitia James vs. the Trump Family'.
​

​

 

Except the WSJ Editorial conveniently ignores that Trump was also DEVALUING his assets for tax purposes and that was revealed with the NYT got a look at his taxes. And yes again Weisselberg was convicted on tax evasion regarding illegal compensation for the Trump Organization.

Also again the WSJ also leans on this argument that the banks aren't suing Trump that others have brought up. Trump has defaulted on loans and went into bankruptcy before so it's not like he was constantly or uniquely profitable. Next is many banks have quit lending to him so obviously many banks consider him untrustworthy and a risk not worth taking. The most important point though is that if someone defrauds someone else and they get away with it that doesn't mean that fraud wasn't committed. Just because someone gets away with something doesn't mean it's ethically or legally correct then.

 

Is there any speculation in this WSJ piece?

 

there you go again, OT, falling for the intellectually dishonest op/ed,

thru sleight of hand, diverting attention away from this 2018 lawsuit (filed by James's predecessor) against the Trump foundation, orange hair and all his adult children,
on the heels of the previous AG's lawsuit against, and the eventual class action settlement with, Trump University for fraud.​

Attorney General Underwood Announces Lawsuit Against Donald J. Trump Foundation And Its Board Of Directors
For Extensive And Persistent Violations Of State And Federal Law

​

 

That b**** ass lying talking down to me ain't funny. You think it's funny to be a fraud. That's your problem

 

earth to the mental midget, PGab,

stop publicizing your stupidity !​

 

I think it's Hi-larious.

 

Ah, one of your favorite sources, the Wall Street Journal editorial board, a hard-right group sure to turn you on.

 

So you disagree with the statement, "But the Democrats pursuing him have become Captain Ahabs bent on taking him down by any means necessary."

 

Yes, I certainly do. It's good to see a political party bent on taking down an individual who's ardent desire is to destroy our democratic institutions. It's a pity that you don't share that same desire.

 

well the word on the street is they finally got the b*stard now

 

Not at all especially considering how cautious Merrick Garland and other prosecutors have been regarding Trump.

Now let me ask you, are you ok with a former President keeping classified documents after he’s left office in an unsecured location?

 

Yes they didn’t get him when he was forced to settle over his fake university or shut down his foundation and have his kids take remedial courses in charity 101.

 

if they are a bunch of "classified" Christmas cards, sure, why not?

the fact of the matter is NOBODY yet knows what the documents are.

And on some level I feel like if he was qualified to see and possess those documents (whatever they are) when he was President, what really is the big difference now that he is a former President?

yes, I understand that legally he can't possess them and yes, legally he is breaking the law--and that's wrong. On the other hand, I just think anti-Trumpers have their shorts in a bunch and are just acting in ridiculous ways. There are FAR more important things the nation should be dealing with than outdated "classified" documents in Trump's closet, secured or unsecured.

 

hey, it's been fun. But the Yankees are playing the Red Sox on Apple TV tonight. as they say when an Aaron Judge home run sails over the fence . . . "SEE YA!!!!"

 

Speculative defense about what is in them you’re making an assumption that they are “Christmas’s cards” but from the evidence already released they do deal with human intelligence and other highly sensitive matters.

You recognize too that it is illegal for him to possess them yet your defense seems to be they we should just make an exception for him. That’s hardly respecting the rule of law.