Jon Stewart shreds the "victimless crime" claim of Trump's fraud guilty judgment
- Thread starter Menace Sockeyes
- Start date
i love the indignation o'leary has over the thought that "the investment community" might actually be prosecuted
oh no...imagine the horror!
oh no...imagine the horror!
I am so glad he’s back on TV. Man have I missed him. Our nation needs him.
When the bank evaluates the property and puts their own value on it as collateral, and agrees to lend the money which is paid back, there is no victim.
I said it in another thread — drunk driving is completely acceptable because the driver didn't crash into anyone/anything while heading home from the bar. It's a victimless crime!
Can you carry the analogy through and explain the equivalent of a drunk hitting a minivan and killing some kids, but with Trump borrowing money on collateral the bank agreed to.
What is the ‘vehicular homicide’ equivalent that this prosecution hopes to prevent in the future?
Other people can't get loans because of the fraud Trump commits. When he takes money from the banks, that is less money for them to give to others. It may not be the equivalent of killing other people, but it isn't victimless either.
So by that logic I should be able to list my income on my yearly tax filings as in the poverty level so I don't have to pay taxes and because there is no victim, it should be perfectly legal?
Also, the law in NY states there doesn't have to be a victim for this kind of fraud. The only victims are the ones that are playing it up as such because they got caught.
If Hunter and Joe sold their name when he was NOT VP, who is the victim and why is the House GOP all over it? No victim, so no crime, right?
What says the party of "law and order" about this?
That's cute...you think the banks check behind people like Trump. You'd think they would have tumbled to the fact that his penthouse was one-third the size of what he claimed. But keep kissing that Trump ass.
But the drunk *didn't* crash into a minivan and didn't kill some kids in my scenario — they made it barely home to the driveway and passed out on the porch. Hence it's a victimless crime and not a big deal!!! Crimes aren't *really* crimes unless someone is harmed or something truly bad happens, amirite?!?!
you're asking what the catastrophic impact of banks lending money based on intentionally inflated or misvalued assets could possibly be?
You can always count on simonole97 to make some dumbass analogy. He is akin to Gerald Broflovski in the episode when they move to San Francisco.
Yeah, NOBODY ever "illegally" inflates the value of something they try to sell, do they? And what is "legally" inflating? There has to be an opposite
No you are not right,.. In your scenario, the drunk driver endangered society and broke specific rules that he agreed to abide by when applying for his drivers license.
What I've learned from this thread: crimes are only crimes if committed by liberals. Fascists can shoot someone on times square and it wouldn't be a crime because it committed by a fascist. Carry on.
Nobody was injured and no property was damaged — it's a victimless crime!!!!!!!
(BTW: I agree with you 100%)
People don't break specific rules when they apply for loans? I'm pretty sure they sign a document stating all information is true and accurate, etc.
Trump hurt society by underpaying his taxes and then broke specific rules that he agreed to abide by when applying for a loan.
Is it ok for me to tell the government I made 20k last year and tell the bank I made 700k last year when applying for a loan??? Because that's what Trump did only difference was it was the value of his assets that he used and not income.
So if you want to make it apples to apples I tell the government my house is worth 50k when it comes to paying my property taxes but when I go try to get a 2nd mortgage I tell the bank it's worth 500k. You are perfectly ok with that and find it neither immoral nor illegal?
I think the government would assert you’re defrauding them with regard to income, and thus evading taxes. The government would consider itself the victim of your fraud.
it seems like the position is this...
lying on loan applications is fine as long as you never default on those loans
There are questions of selective targeting of a poltical opponent. Have these laws been universally applied over the course of time. If so, what are the specific cases?
None of us want to live in a banana republic.
None of us want to live in a banana republic.
What taxes did he supposedly under pay?,.. What aspects of his loan agreements did he not live up to?,.. Show me who has standing in this artificial case...
That would be you telling your targeted love interest that you're "this big"...
...when the reality is...
Yeah, you’re more of a Trump Steak republic kind of guy.
I can't say how well they have been applied or enforced, but I can say when you go do things like run for president you tend to invite scrutiny into your past dealings that may not have existed before.
He did something illegal than he ran for president which brought the scrutiny.
And yet, you defend the banana king at every opportunity. Curious.
trump has literally said he wants to be a dictator ("but only for one day") and his lawyer has argued he should be allowed to assassinate political opponents
that's a lot closer to "banana republic" stuff than someone rich being exposed to our legal system (OH THE HORROR!)
In drunk driving we know what harm the law is trying to mitigate - death and injury from a crash caused by an impaired driver.
I’m asking what is the thing we’re hoping to preclude with this prosecution.
I think perhaps people should be reminded that he undervalued those same properties when it came to paying his property taxes. So the state of New York is a victim because he underpaid his taxes.
Also the banks did collect a lower interest rate because of his. So he stole from the banks as well. Of all people you would think Republicans would care about the profitability of a business.
Also the banks did collect a lower interest rate because of his. So he stole from the banks as well. Of all people you would think Republicans would care about the profitability of a business.
Is the New York DA running for president. Does Biden oversee her in some way. You could make that claim every time a DA of an opposing party sues the administration.
Last edited:
asked above, but i guess you missed it
you can't think of a harm the law is trying to prevent by prosecuting people who intentionally over-inflate assets to get more favorable loans?
Taxpayers, on their own, do not get to establish the value of their taxable real estate, nor do borrowers, on their own, get to establish the value of any collateral that they might be using to support a loan...
They can provide their estimate of square footage,.. the other involved party can provide theirs.
