The 4th clue in in today's "Name Drop" game:
२ ऑक्टोबर, २०२३
2 things at The New Yorker this morning resonated, and I took these screenshots.
That first article, the one about Trump (I'll get to the second article in another post):
The 4th clue in in today's "Name Drop" game:
The 4th clue in in today's "Name Drop" game:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१७ टिप्पण्या:
My TED talk on lying never lies - You can tell they are lying by the exaggerated language if the headline:(
The Powerful New York Law That Finally Brought Trump to Book. Suspiciously they omitted the duping language from Ann’s teaser…
…and I read the thing and still don’t see the fraud. I would like to know about this ‘objective’ valuation method the judge has invented. She should share it with the world. There’s prolly one of those econ sort-of Nobels in it for her if she does as this foolproof method would save everyone from lot of risk and uncertainty and therefore money…
Incidentally, calling the New York law powerful is no lie. It is so powerful it empowers judges to charge the innocent with crimes…
…incidentally, did you know there is a powerful law in Massachusetts that empowers labor unions to legally commit serious crimes? …but only if the crimes are committed while in the service of the labor unions, however. We wouldn’t want laws granting criminals unlimited power now, would we?
The only way real estate can be ‘objectively’ valued is to sell it. Otherwise, it's value is just an opinion generated from recent sales of similar property. Such opinions have at least a 10% uncertainty. Put it on the market to see its true value.
Trump should challenge that law. And demand prosecution of the prosecutor for malicious prosecution.
Tar. Feathers. The judge can perhaps be educated.
Nietzsche would probably have approved of Trump.
I wonder if there are any other examples of this New York law being used in such a draconian fashion. I’d bet my house that there is not a single property-owning entity in the state that claims identical asset valuations for managerial accounting, tax assessments, and loan appraisals. In fact I’m not even sure that’s possible, without running afoul of other laws.
I wonder if there are any other examples of this New York law being used in such a draconian fashion
You’ll just have to wonder unless you’re more successful than I in trying to find the law that last week’s ruling was based on. I’ve never heard of a fraud trial with no victims defrauded and no actual damages. Is this one of the new “get Trump” laws that James promised when she ran for NYAG? Who knows! News doesn’t do facts anymore especially not when it’s Trump news.
Destroy Trump by any means. He deserves it.
That's the message.
Maybe someone familiar with business property accounting can help me out here. I have a dim recollection that commercial property can be valued by various methods, including, among other things: (1) market value (sales prices of recent comparable properties (perhaps reduced to some appraised value that is a percentage of the market value?), and (2) gross? net? lease income per square foot (ie., cash flow or something like that?) As you can tell, I'm operating here at a level of major ignorance...
Notwithstanding that he may ultimately be responsible for their data, Trump is not going to complete and file his various business forms himself. They are likely signed and filed by his tax accountants as his agent for such matters.
My question is, where are the Trump companies' accountants in the NY state lawsuit? (A) If they prepared and filed (on Trump's behalf) erroneous and/or misleading returns, loan aplications, etc., then does he not have some manner of a cause of action against them? (B) Before the judge ruled on the charge of fraud, were the accountants not required to testify, show their work, etc., in support of the Trump tax/loan paperwork? That is, was he not allowed a defense? I may have just missed it, but I've not read anything in the media that resembles any discussion of his accounting-related responses/defense in the matter.
I'd really like someone to offer a better 30k-foot overview of summary decision & issues than what I read in the general media.... If my comment & questions betray my utter ignorance, you have my abject apologies. :-)
Clue #4 said...
"The protagonist of one of my other novels justifies his actions by comparing himself to Napoleon, arguing that 'great men by their very nature cannot fail to be criminals'."
There's also the bumper sticker (and book) "Well-behaved women seldom make history."
Combining the two lead us to the conclusion that non well-behaved women, by their very nature, cannot fail to be criminals.
Hassayamper @ 8:35: “… In fact I’m not even sure that’s possible, without running afoul of other laws.”. Good point. If everybody wants to get a valuation that will survive scrutiny by the Great Judicial Mind of Ergoron and all his kind, they will want to coordinate and agree (and document) what every asset is worth. That is a lot of smoke-filled rooms too —excuse my rudeness— FIX PRICES.
Isn’t there a law about that? Hmmm.
ColoComment @ 9:56: “…utter ignorance…”. Your line of questioning is IMHO aw-shucks in the same style as Peter Falk in “Columbo.” In any case, I share your predicament. Our problem is we are still trying to approach this phenomenon as susceptible to reason, logic, principle, fairness; when none of that applies.
As my colleague (a former JAG officer) used to say, “Guilty! What’s the charge?”
ColoComment
Real estate appraisal is, how we say, fungable. Every player has an appraiser. The seller, the buyer and the bank. Now to make matters worse, for property tax purposes, so does the state. Valuation is determined by what other comprable properties sold in that area. The appraisor can move that boundry to get comperables. Up to a point. The comprables have to be within the taxing body boundaries. "What if there are no comprables?" This is where the Magic happens. When you have a unique propoerty there is a battle between your appraiser and the state. Compromises are made. They get expensive.
"...to live outside the law, you must be honest."
Owen at 10/2/23, 11:22 AM
Ya' GOT me! :-)
BTW, here's the link to the judge's decision. I just started on it, cuz no maatter that IANAL, I like to read these things for myself, rather than rely on someone else's filter.
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=op8OyfqVHpc6eGTx9LOw3Q==&system=prod
Trump is not and was not the only commercial real estate developer in NYC.
Surely there must have been dozens of similar prosecutions brought previously under this same theory.
Right?
I mean, a person who runs for office on the explicit promise that she is going to prosecute Donald Trump wouldn't just charge him with alleged crimes for which there is no legal precedent.
That would be a "Bill of Attainder," which our Constitution explicitly prohibits.
And prosecutors are bound by a "Code of Ethics." Which they follow religiously.
So obviously Trump is guilty.
ANDREW MCCARTHY: With Trump Already Found Guilty, His New York Fraud Trial Begins. “This isn’t a judicial proceeding; it’s a partisan farce. . . . Most significantly, the good judge imposed the corporate death penalty: putting Trump, his adult sons, and the Trump Organization out of business, taking away their state-issued business licenses, calling for the appointment of receivers to oversee the dissolution of Trump’s business entities, and continuing to subject him to monitors. And now, after all that, the trial begins.”
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा