Posted on 11/28/2023 1:54:09 PM PST by thegagline
***Defense attorney Christopher Kise requested Judge Engoron issue a directed verdict at the conclusion of testimony from Deutsche Bank managing director Dave Williams***
"Was an event of default ever declared by Deutsche Bank on the loans to the Trump Organization?" defense attorney Jesus Suarez asked Williams at the end of Williams' testimony.
"No," Williams replied, prompting Kise to jump up and make his request.
"This witness has again testified the bank conducted its own due diligence" and was not defrauded by Trump's statements of financial condition, Kise argued.
*** Judge Engoron took the defense's motion under advisement but signaled he was unmoved.
"The mere fact that the lenders were happy doesn't mean the statute wasn't violated," Engoron said.*** Deutsche Bank did its own due diligence to estimate Trump's net worth, landing on a figure that differed from Trump's reported net worth by over $2 billion -- but the difference didn't concern the bank, according to testimony from managing director Dave Williams.
Trump reported a net worth of nearly $5 billion in 2013, according to documents shown at trial. The bank's own Valuation Services Group produced an estimate of only $2.6 billion, a difference that Williams described as "not unusual or atypical."
"My reaction was probably pretty measured," Williams said about learning that the bank determined that Trump's net worth was nearly half the estimate provided by Trump. "We are expected to conduct due diligence and verify information to the extent that is possible."
Even with Deutsche Bank's lower estimate, the former president easily met the bank’s $100 million net-worth requirement for high-net-worth individuals, according to Williams.
“He reported both a net worth and investable assets well in excess of our minimum requirements,” Williams said, confirming that the bank set the interest rate for Trump’s commercial loans between 2%-2.5%.***
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
This is absolutely an outrageous abuse of justice, OUTRAGEOUS!
The Judge is PURE EVIL .....DISGUSTING LIBERAL DEMOCRATJEW who needs an EXORCISM By his RABBI.
Trump prosecuted for “overinflating” asset values by prosecutor overinflating lender losses.
This is when the House Judiciary committee Subpoena’s his corrupt ass to Congress to talk about this case, Statute of Limitations, Fraud upon the Court by Public Servants, and NEVER STOP until he cries uncle.
“U.S. CODE
TITLE 2—THE CONGRESS
CHAPTER 6—CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMITTEE PROCEDURE; INVESTIGATIONS
Sec. 193. Privilege of witnesses
No witness is privileged to refuse to testify to any fact, or to produce any paper, respecting which he shall be examined by either House of Congress, or by any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or by any committee of either House, upon the ground that his testimony to such fact or his production of such paper may tend to disgrace him or otherwise render him infamous.”
Simply look up Hinds Precedents, especially chapters 53 and 51, and Cannon’s Precedents, especially chapters 184-185. You’ll find numerous detailed cases of Congress asserting its power, arresting people, holding them until they agreed to answer questions, and then releasing them. Some of these people did not refuse to appear, but simply failed to satisfactorily answer questions.
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.” http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html 73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934) https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
In 1857, a New York Times reporter refused to say which members of Congress had asked him to get them bribes (protecting his “sources” just as various Judith Millers today protect the people who feed them proven lies that costs thousands of lives), so Congress locked him up until he answered and then banned him from Congress.
In 1924 an oil executive appeared but refused to answer certain questions, so the Senate held — literally held — him in contempt. Senator Thomas Walsh of Montana argued that this question of contempt was of the gravest importance, and that it involved “the very life of the effective existence of the House of Representatives of the United States and of the Senate of the United States.” The matter was taken to court, and the witness fined and imprisoned.
Judge Engoron took the defense’s motion under advisement but signaled he was unmoved.
He had Trump guilty before the trial started it’s going to roll over him to much evidence in Trumps favor.
No reason why all the trials shouldn’t be overturned.
Liberty still on the gallows
“ Even with Deutsche Bank’s lower estimate, the former president easily met the bank’s $100 million net-worth requirement for high-net-worth individuals, according to Williams.”
Bank estimated 26 times the required amount.
There was no fraud, not even close.
It’s hard to express how corrupt this case is.
The people who brought it and continue it should be the ones on trial for abuse of power.
Trump fraud trial live updates: Trump never risked defaulting on loan covenants, banker suggests
How about:
Trump fraud trial live updates: Trump never risked defaulting on loan covenants, banker testifies
-PJ
It’s plain to all this judge will rule for liability, and it will be appealed.
Trump prosecuted for “overinflating” asset values by prosecutor overinflating lender losses.
The judge already found Trump liable before the trial even started. The trial’s just to determine the damages.
Well of course not his sole purpose is to get Trump fined and given a guilty verdict the DNCMedia and the FJBiden team can run against.
He's unmoved because his mind is already made up and all and any evidence showing otherwise will never "move" him.
In granting the Motion for Partial Judgment, the Judge has already found that Trump has had “the propensity to engage in persistent fraud,"
WHAT STATUTE????
STATING WHAT?????
later
yah!!
If the bank conducted their own appraisals as testified today, then approved the loan then that establishes market value (less a safety margin). If you seek a loan for $100 and put up collateral in excess of $100 the loan seeker and loan giver do not have to agree on your net worth, just that the collateral covers the loan.
Once you declare via courts that the state is a person. the state can be defrauded and that is what is being litigated. The state will in the end the via the judge will be determined to in fact been defrauded. cuz it is all made up.
Trump reported a net worth of nearly $5 billion in 2013, according to documents shown at trial. The bank’s own Valuation Services Group produced an estimate of only $2.6 billion, a difference that Williams described as “not unusual or atypical.”
...
Even with Deutsche Bank’s lower estimate, the former president easily met the bank’s $100 million net-worth requirement for high-net-worth individuals, according to Williams.
I know. I was just trying to mimic a Babylon Bee headline.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.