Legal analysts say Trump admitted that the intent in financial representations he made was to convince lenders to loan him money.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -471 year ago

    Of course? That’s why he was talking the the lenders in the first place. He was trying to get a loan. If he intentionally falsified the information is another question, but of course he was trying to get a loan.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        571 year ago

        That’s the thing about effective prosecutions. They break it down into tiny little baby steps, each of which are simple and true, and nobody can argue against them. Then they put them all together, and the case is ironclad.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      311 year ago

      When someone’s on trial for a crime, the state often needs to prove the person intended to commit the crime. Trump saying he intended to use those documents to secure a loan proves intent.

      The court has already established the documents contained knowingly false information, with the residence that Trump has lived in for decades being listed as 3x its actual size. Even conservatively, his property holdings were overestimated by $812 million. The judge ruled there was no way that could be considered an accident.

      So the court has ruled that the documents are knowingly false, and now Trump stated he intended to use them to get a loan. No lawyer in the world could get Trump out of this one.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      15
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      All these morons like yourself don’t understand shit about these court cases but you sure feel confident in sharing your uneducated opinions!

      Do yourself a favor, check out Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner, legal AF, or the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s The Breakdown: the Trump indictment

      Maybe you’ll actually realize what is going on instead of going by clickbait titles in the media

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        I know enough (thanks to everyone who kindly replied) to know that everyone in the world save for those directly involved in the court case can safely assume Trump wanted a loan when he a applied for a loan. Sure, it’s an important step for the lawyers, but it’s so obvious that it’s only newsworthy if they couldn’t establish it.

        The article is a waste of time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -281 year ago

      Yeah, I’m not sure what the news part about this is. This feels like it’s building to something newsworthy but isn’t itself newsworthy. It’s not exactly shocking that the person applying for a loan wanted a loan.

      • squiblet
        link
        fedilink
        121 year ago

        The lawyers and legal analysts think it’s significant. While it seems obvious to us, it’s part of proving their case step-by-step.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -11 year ago

          That’s exactly what I said. It is a piece to building something newsworthy, but in itself isn’t.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Why don’t you go ahead and tell all of these legal analysts they’re wrong, I wonder how they would react to a layman such as yourself dripping with willful ignorance telling them what they say is meaningless and not shocking

        Like, it’s not about shock it’s about the court case. If you don’t understand it, maybe try and learn first. I’ll give you a jump start, check out Justice Matters with Glenn Kirschner, Legal AF, or the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s The breakdown: the Trump indictment

        Maybe you’ll actually understand what is being done and why, informed by actual fucking lawyers instead of going by news articles and clickbait.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -31 year ago

          That’s not how this works. I shouldn’t have to be previously informed of legal documents in order to understand a news article. The article should cover that… I don’t have the time to be reading legal docs that will in no way benefit my life. If the news can’t inform me, then it isn’t newsworthy. That’s just bad journalism.

      • mommykink
        link
        fedilink
        -371 year ago

        The news is that the left never learned that Trump rode his way to presidency off these meaningless “guyz guess what stupid thing le drumpf did today click our paywall article to find out and remember to turn off ad blocker or you hate democracy” articles.

        • squiblet
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Truly would have been nice if the media had stfu about him at any time in the past few years. Amazing how much free publicity they give this chump while they profit from it.