From your AP link:
And though the bank offered Trump lower interest rates because he had agreed to personally guarantee the loans with his own money, it’s not clear how much better the rates were because of the inflated figures. The bank never complained, and it’s unclear how much it lost, if anything. Bank officials called to testify couldn’t say for sure if Trump’s personal statement of worth had any impact on the rates.


Bell_curve

Because this was a civil case the state would only target rich people 

> Lenders can reject your application

An interesting question to ask is why a foreign bank would choose *not* to reject an obviously fraudulent application for funds by a former president.

If you or I would get in trouble for lying like this on forms, why should the president be exempt? 

It’s a loan application. Lenders can reject your application 

To be specific about what he's being accused of in this instance:

Trump exaggerated the size of his Manhattan penthouse apartment by three times. He listed unfinished buildings as if they were complete, and apartments under rent-control as if they were free of such rules. He showed restricted funds as if they were liquid cash. And Trump valued Mar-a-Lago as a single residence, though he had signed away rights to develop it as anything but a club.

Properties like this were used as the basis for loans that were overvalued for what they were worth.  He should not have gotten that money based on that criteria.

The perspective of most conservative media is that this was a political hit job on a victimless crime.

letting such lies to banks slide if those banks don’t take legal action on their own would amount to saying, “if you are rich enough, you are going to be allowed to do it.”

https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-business-law-courts-banks-lending-punishment-2ee9e509a28c24d0cda92da2f9a9b689

news

What does SN think of the Trump/NYC verdict?

SimpleStacker

>>For background, he was ordered to pay a penalty of some $300+ million because he overstated the worth of his real estate on loan applications.  


To be specific about what he's being accused of in this instance:

>Trump exaggerated the size of his Manhattan penthouse apartment by three times. He listed unfinished buildings as if they were complete, and apartments under rent-control as if they were free of such rules. He showed restricted funds as if they were liquid cash. And Trump valued Mar-a-Lago as a single residence, though he had signed away rights to develop it as anything but a club.

Properties like this were used as the basis for loans that were overvalued for what they were worth.  He should not have gotten that money based on that criteria.

>The perspective of most conservative media is that this was a political hit job on a victimless crime.

counterpoint:
>letting such lies to banks slide if those banks don’t take legal action on their own would amount to saying, “if you are rich enough, you are going to be allowed to do it.”

source:
https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-business-law-courts-banks-lending-punishment-2ee9e509a28c24d0cda92da2f9a9b689
