I think Rachel made a big mistake tonight

Sorry, but Trump never corrected the typo.

Rachel is right in that the SDNY is good at prosecuting typos like these.

Fishy that that was the year of the Deutsche Bank application.

How do you say typo in Russian anyway

r2 опечатка

It doesn’t matter that he didn’t correct the typo because the bottom line (total assets) is not affected by switching the values of two assets.

Even if you reverse the numbers, they make no sense. The Bedford Estate is (according to the Westchester towns who tax it) worth about $19.5 million. Trump's financial disclosure forms list it as worth $50 million. As for Trump Tower, it should be worth about $450 million, so why would it be listed in loan documents as worth $291 million? It all suggests a world in which every number is arbitrary, made up, and has no relationship to reality.

And since he didn't buy the Buffalo Bills, did he even take out the loan?

R4, banks do not look simply at the "bottom line". They evaluate, among other things, the quality and relative liquidity of your assets, which is why you should carefully proof-read your financial statements.

R6, it's my understanding that he was not able to get the loan, but that does not matter. Manafort didn't get his loans, either; he was still convicted of bank fraud.

I don't really watch the networks anymore, but I've watched MSNBC the last couple of nights just to see the coverage of the Cohen thing and I found Maddow's constant laughing tonight quite annoying. I think she's such an intelligent woman, but she needs to stop that silliness. It takes away from what she's saying.

As the NY AG gets ready to roll out charges against Baby Trump,Ivanka the stepford wife and Kushner the failed middle east deal maker.I think Trump's properties and the tax scams pulled with mortgaging them will become very important. Thats how they laundered money,thats the fruit of this whole mess.Getting inflated mortgages,tax breaks and inflated valuations.An aparently Fred Trump taught Donald everything.So Maddow didn't make a mistake,she is setting the stage for what's to come.But its okay OP,are you Hannity?

It is on record that Justice Kennedy's son approved a sizable loan for Trump for Deutsche Bank at this time.

Hi Boris! Hi Natasha!

Rachel was spot on calling out the fraudster in chief.

Plus he has symptoms of alzheimer's.

Let the investigations begin.

R11 OP is just Very Concerned!!!!!

I quit watchin the bitch, she takes half an hr to make her point, …. she wears me out with her hi drama introductions to crap storys. gads

Any bank officer examining the report closely would spot the error and understand that it was the mansion that was worth $27 million (and yes, this is probably overstated, but not to a criminal extent), and the hotel tower that was worth $290 million, not the other way around. It’s an obvious and immaterial error in this context.

r13 you need to grow up and work harder! You are not convincing. Once you up your game you will get that dacha.

[quote]Kushner the failed middle east deal maker

Considering scum like him are directly involved in the reason there is no peace (funding illegal settlements and being a rabid Zionist), no deal could ever be made under his watch. It was like sending a jackal to negotiate between jackals and deer.

is* directly

An in rush the MAGA apologist's to defend their fraudulent Shit King.So funny.

His demise and you all's tears will be an early Christmas for all of us who TOLD YOU SO

^^^ thanks for posting, Rachel, glad ur here to defend ur mess.

This is indeed sad. R14 = "overstating the value of an asset by millions of dollars is not a crime." Why don't you try that and see what happens?

Rachel is a cult figure who is revered by partisan democrats for telling them exactly what they want to hear.

she jus goes off on these damn tangents and looks the fool.

no wonder she aint on other shows....

embarassing

R22, at least type the words properly so it isn't obvious you're some reddit incel-type.

I do real estate fraud investigation. It most certainly is a crime.

r22 and yet her ratings consistently top Fox'.

I do not miss her.

And when she reads from court documents, I get so excited.

go back to grading ur 3rd graders home work mary…..

[quote]Rachel is a cult figure who is revered by partisan democrats for telling them exactly what they want to hear.

The fact that you're stating FOX 's total MO and project that onto Maddow, is fucking sad as hell. She doesn't engage in hyperbole and hysteria or tell people what hey want to hear - that would be FOX. Incredibly dumb people who listen to Trump say something and then he denies saying it, and they then believe he didn't say it - people like you, troll

[quote]go back to grading ur 3rd graders home work mary….

Go back TO third grade, you semi-literate speed bump.

The document was one of many on which trump has committed fraud to get loans or insurance. There will be many more to come. He's criminal, plain and simple.

Ok Boris. This is all Maddow’s fault.

Trump is exonerated!!

Rachel is a treasure. She's smart and informative.

sorry mary, ive a phd in English lit

go cry!

What's funny is that they can't actually refute the info she puts on air, meanwhile, Jon Stewart made his fucking career pointing to the "LOL" lies FOX would tell. Nothing fact-based, just pure, unadulterated BULLSHIT and their idiot viewers holding knife and fork and wearing a napkin around their necks just waiting to be fed that bullshit about the Obamas' "Terrorist fist bump."

R32, you're a foreigner.

she messes up a lot. none of her speculation has held up. but it doesn't matter because people still act like she is the "queen."

but the truth is, she has contributed the least to the trump/russia/money reporting

Really, R35? Back up with evidence, please.

R36, he writes like he cuts letters out of a magazine, you think you're going to get a lucid response from this fool?

Rachel [bold]ALWAYS[/bold], and I mean [bold]ALWAYS[/bold], backs her stories with receipts.

Unlike R35, pulling his half-baked opinions out of his butthole and pretending they're true.

If you want to know the difference between Maddow and say, Tucker Carlson...I doubt you'll find video that Maddow was too chickenshit to air because she was made to look like a complete fool by a Dutch Historian who handed her ass to her.

Can any of you name ONE original report from the Maddow show? All of her speculation about oligarchs and such, all of her assumptions and story-telling. Has ANY OF IT borne out?

She made a big deal about the transcript being edited, which was a lie, then her whole chad report was shouted down as nonsense. People are always talking about what a genius she is for "seeing connections no one else has" but has ANY OF HER SPECULATIVE REPORTING AND CONNECTION-MAKING borne out?

WaPo, NYT, even CNN are the ones making actual contributions. Maddow is spinning exciting fairy tales with no basis in reality. And doing everyone a disservice.

Prominent Russian prostitute Glenn Greenwald has spent two years vehemently insisting to anybody who will listen that Rachel's obsession with Russia's ratfucking of the US election is a total fantasy.

The $500K in Russian money he receives every year to fund The Intercept has absolutely nothing to do with that assertion, of course.

R39

Tucker Carlson is a paid shill. I am talking about actual journalists who get short shrift for doing careful investigative work, while rachel walks away with all the praise because she is so EXCITING

[quote]Can any of you name ONE original report from the Maddow show?

The one about the weird fake Azerbaijan hotel. Ask Ivanka.

[quote]Can any of you name ONE original report from the Maddow show?

Bagman. The research on which led to the discussion of the 1973 Justice Dept. memo on whether Agnew could be charged, and the implications for Trump. The common wisdom that Trump can't be indicted in office is far from legally settled precedent.

[quote]All of her speculation about oligarchs and such, all of her assumptions and story-telling. Has ANY OF IT borne out?

Yes. All of it. If you were even remotely paying attention you'd know that.

I meant, can you name a single original report that has been proven correct. Even one. Has any of her reporting being confirmed by ANYONE.

R44

Could you give me some specific examples please?

Can you read, r45? Are you completely illiterate?

R47

I can't read something that's not there. You named a couple of reports that have not been confirmed by anyone else. I am asking for ONE that has.

R45 must be that brain-damaged congressman from LA during Cohen's testimony.

"WHAR AM THOSE BOXES???"

"In my house. The FBI took them then they gave them back to -"

"THOSE BOXES. WHAR AM THOSE BOXES NOW?"

"In my house."

"WHAT AM THEY?? WE NEED THEM BOXES."

MAGA trolls are mad....so funny. Their comments are exactly why RED Republican states are some of the poorest in the nation.

The dummies are clearly inbred.

Yeah, I hate Trump. I am not a republican. But I also care about real journalism. And Maddow is not a journalist. She used to be a good commentator but now she has become a pandering hack.

And I am still waiting for ONE EXAMPLE OF AN ORIGINAL MADDOW REPORT THAT HAS BEEN BORNE OUT BY FACTS AND REALITY.

Hell, even the WSJ has contributed more to getting Trump out of office.

[quote]Could you give me some specific examples please?

Could [bold]YOU[/bold] give some specific examples, you trolling brain-damaged ape?

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Rachel's reporting on Trump's mysteriously massive "inauguration fund" (Who was contributing? Where was the money going? It clearly wasn't going to the entertainment). Remember the $10 million payment to a "friend" of Melania who did nothing?) She was on this story from the moment Trump entered office, and she provided details about it for months while most ignored it. And, yet, in December of last year, a formal federal investigation into the fund has now been opened.

Dr. Maddow is a news analyst and historian. Her staff scours the developing news to tie to things most other people have forgotten.

She is brilliant at this.

If you want original investigatory content, listen to her six p[[art series on Agnew entitled Bagman.

The people she has interviewed for that and subsequently the DOJ lawyers who crafted the original "YOU CANNOT INDICT A SITTING PRESIDENT" policy have current implications.

Dr. Maddow is brilliant.

Иди и трахни себя, Иван

Thank you, R54. Definitely one we forgot to add. She was on that when nobody else was.

"Bagman" is brilliant reporting, exhaustive research, and uncomfortably relevant to the current legal crisis the country is in.

There. That's a specific example. Try to say that again and I'll smack you through your fucking laptop screen.

[R54][R56]

These trolls already know that...they are just playing dumb for their Ignorant Shit President. An their upset,everybody knows that they are just as dumb as he is.So they bait in threads like this. As they suck down mountain dew and meth cocktails.An take turns seducing their siblings. They are trash,and prove it everytime they open their ignorant mouths.

R57 I am NOT A TRUMP SUPPORTER I will be the happiest person when he is voted out, or indicted, preferably both. Just STOP. I appreciate good journalists, like Fahrenthold. NOT MADDOW.

R53 Examples of what? How can I give examples of things that did not happen?

I'll also go out on a limb here and assert that Maddow realizes she's not an investigative journalist. Not what she does. She's a fucking brilliant analyst.

R59

THANK YOU. I wish her crazy fans would realize that too.

GIVE ME SOME CONCRETE EXAMPLES.

*concrete examples*

YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. GIVE ME SOME CONCRETE EXAMPLES.

*concrete examples*

CAN'T ANYBODY GIVE A SIMPLE CONCRETE EXAMPLE.

The trolls love to put people on defense - prove it that I am wrong! No matter what you say back and how much information you give them, they shout - prove it that I am wrong!

They're not here for the conversation. They're here to stir shit by pretending that it's up to you to inform them.

Rule #1: Never criticize Hillary Clinton - EVER!

Rule #2: Never criticize Rachel Maddow - EVER!

Rule #3 (embryonic): Never criticize Kamala Harris - EVER!

R62

What conversation? I made the observation that Maddow's reporting is not borne out by facts, and you demanded proof. You are the one acting like it's my job to educate you.

Anyway, you proved my point. I said none of her stories have borne out. You couldn't think of a single one that has.

Now you can go back to your circle-jerk.

Rule #1: Never criticize Vladimir Putin - EVER!

Rule #2: Never criticize Kim Jong-un - EVER!

Rule #3 Never criticize Jeffrey Epstein - EVER!

Wouldn’t it depend if he was conflating his personal assets with his business assets? If he was inflating his personal holdings to security a line of credit using misstated numbers that he failed to correct - that’s a problem.

[quote]What conversation? I made the observation that Maddow's reporting is not borne out by facts, and you demanded proof.

That's not me, dear. That was my first post and a general observation on what trolls do. Funny you should think I meant you. Hmmh...

[quote]You are the one acting like it's my job to educate you.

That's interesting too. You see, you have been up and down this thread asking of others to educate you on what Maddow is doing right.

R67

Because I was called crazy. And I would like to know why.

Anyway, there is a reason why no journalist ever praises Maddow.

Maddow has like 10 viewers. Who gives a shit?

Here we go again "the rachel maddow is not a investigative journalist " troll strikes again.

R69 why are you here then?

You people are crazy.

[R58]

Liar....weak pathetic little liar.At least get some balls and admit you support him.Or stop running in threads defending him,calling his frauds non crimes. You sound stupid.Own your shit darling or choke on it.The choice is yours tink tink

mary, why do u defend a bombastic old lez like her???

Like most superior intellectuals, when I want the real deal I go to brian Williams or Lawrence O'Donnell....

R73

Huh? I have NEVER ONCE called his frauds non-crimes. Or defended him. Why the fuck would I? Are you high or insane?

As with a home loan, don't the banks do their own appraisals? Why the fuck would they believe what you send them- they have to independently verify this shit...

A couple of months ago many of these posters were after Joy Anne Reid. Now it's Rachel. We know your game.

well people had good reason for "going after" joy, it's ridic that she is still on msnbc

Just ignore these idiot trolls. Stop responding to them. Just F&F and ignore and hope their computers explode.

Rachel Maddow is not an investigator by trade. So to those "demanding" anything of her simply need to STFU.

This thread is funny

Especially since Maxine Waters just demanded and got Trump's mortgage information from that bank in question yesterday.So again,Maddow told the Senate where to look for Donnie's frauds. Again.....

If it was such a non-factor OP....why would she do that.Answer....Fraud

Maddow was all but crying on TV when Hillary lost. To Rachel, the Trump administration is one never-ending Lesbian Drama starring herself.

Yup Deutsche Bank will be turning over documents to Maxine Waters per annoucement this am. So Maddow was right on the money

[R83]So your problem isn't Maddow information but her sexual identity. Wow,you probably want her to freak your 500 pound,wedge wearing behind. Nope,Rachel has taste Fraulein.