Trump Says Forbes is Working With Letitia 'Peekaboo' James

[admin]

Trump Mar-a-Lago LIE Comes Back to HAUNT HIM
MeidasTouch
Oct 5, 2023

Highlights:

I would not call Donald Trump a successful real estate developer. You know who can call him a successful real estate developer? People that don't know him well, like Chris Kise and Alina Habba, and don't know what he's all about, and are being paid to say whatever they're saying. He is at best, in his family, a moderately successful real estate management firm and licensing firm about his name. He really doesn't build buildings, and never has, from the ground up, right? From a a giant hole -- you know, of a foundation, you know, below the surface of the earth, all the way to a Topper on the top of a building. That's not really Donald Trump. His father built a lot of apartment buildings in Queens, which is another section of New York, but not a New York developer, or even a worldwide developer. When you see Donald Trump's name emblazoned on buildings in brass or gold, it's likely a licensing deal, where he had very little role in the look and feel of the building. But they paid him a dollar amount in order to put his name on the building. That's called a licensing fee. Maybe he manages the building. Maybe he just looked at some of the furniture, fabric, and electrics, and said yeah, I like those, I don't like those. Use this furniture, not that furniture. That's it. But building a building? That means going to a bank, and getting a construction loan, a series of loans at different phases of the building, as it comes out of the ground. Or multiple houses across a plot of land. That he's not known for. Underneath the fraud that created this multi-billionaire is a reasonably commonplace 100 millionaire that has that business underneath.... He had grandiose theories about himself, and mythology about himself, and big spending habits for him and his family, but a billionaire? A multi-billionaire? A Forbes 400 billionaire? No way. So that's the fraud, right? The avarice and greed of Donald Trump? Underneath it he's a 100 millionaire. But he doesn't like that, so he pumps it up 10 times, 50 times, 100 times, on his financial statement, and he did it -- let me give the example of Mar-a-Lago, once and for all from somebody that's actually visited Mar-a-Lago....

So there's two different Mar-a-Lagos. There's the fantasy Mar-a-Lago of Donald Trump, and his lawyers' creation, that exists in a universe of his own, without a town council, or commissioner, making land use and zoning regulations. Without a land use and zoning map. Or book, or code, that governs and regulates land use and zoning in Palm Beach County. Without a master plan, as they call it in Florida. Without deed restrictions that you've agreed to in order to live on the property. Without -- you can see all the things I've got to leave out -- without conservation easements that you've granted in order to lower your taxes, and promise that you'll keep the green space. If you could get that, if you had all of that, sure, 15 Acres in Palm Beach County, a prime location, not right on the beach, but off the beach, sure, it has value. It's probably several hundred million dollars....

And that's the fraud, right? Because he didn't want to be a 100 millionaire. He wanted to be a multi-billionaire, and beat his daddy. Because his daddy was a 100 millionaire -- Freddy Trump, right? -- when they were performing their own frauds back then. But that didn't content him. And since he had all his financial ruins, and all his financial difficulties, and his bankruptcies, he had to take the Celebrity Apprentice job to pump up his brand, to emblazon it, and stick it on buildings, on licensing deals -- not construction deals -- not development deals. And that is the fraud, and the PT Barnum, and the Bamboozle, of Donald Trump. And it always has been. And people that live and work in New York, that know him, and know people that know him, know that. It's just the American people who didn't know it, because he didn't let them know it. Because he didn't let them have his tax returns, or any of his financial disclosures, before he ran. There's a reason for that.

Think back. Why didn't Donald Trump, why wasn't he more transparent about his finances when he ran? We're seeing why he wasn't. Because it was all a big giant house of cards, a Ponzi scheme, built up on defrauding banks, and making them give him more money, to pump up his net worth than it was really worth.

Popok can’t take Trump’s lawyers’ lying to the people about how much his “trophy” properties are worth anymore. In his Hot Take, Michael Popok who has lived and practiced law in Florida and New York and visited Mar-a-Lago back in the day, explains why the trial team of Habba and Kise are “undereducated” when they discuss Trump’s businesses and his properties value, starting with Mar a Lago.”



Transcript

This is Michael Popok LegalAF. I can't take it anymore. That's why I had to put on these glasses today. I can't take the lying in the opening statements for the fraud trial of the century against Donald Trump and all the Trumpers that just started this week. finally it's here. I say finally it's here, it's only been a year. Leticia James brought her case in September of last year. she's trying her case -- at least the remaining parts of it -- she's already won on summary judgment now -- and they keep lying at every turn, the lawyers for Donald Trump -- Alina Habba -- understood -- Chris Kise -- whatever happened to you? -- about the value of Donald Trump's property and businesses. It's just lies. And I'm finally going to blow it up here. And I'm going to use Mar-a-Lago as an example. From a practicing Florida lawyer, and in New York, I'm uniquely qualified, I believe, and having lived in Palm Beach County, to talk about Mar-A-Lago land use and zoning restrictions that make that property not worth anywhere close to what Donald Trump's lawyers just said in their opening statement. I'm going to explain it here, right now, one place, Meidastouch, on a hot-take, another Popok hot-take.

Let's start with why I'm so fired up this morning over the lying. And I'm going to make an admission. Having watched Donald Trump in action since I was a young man, all the way till now, in his business practices -- I lived in New Jersey -- I watched him operate the casinos -- lived in New York -- watched them operate not a development company -- that's putting it nicely -- I would not call Donald Trump a successful real estate developer. You know who can call him a successful real estate developer? People that don't know him well, like Chris Kise and Alina Habba, and don't know what he's all about, and are being paid to say whatever they're saying. He is at best, in his family, a moderately successful real estate management firm and licensing firm about his name. He really doesn't build buildings, and never has, from the ground up, right? From a a giant hole -- you know, of a foundation, you know, below the surface of the earth, all the way to a Topper on the top of a building. That's not really Donald Trump. His father built a lot of apartment buildings in Queens, which is another section of New York, but not a New York developer, or even a worldwide developer. When you see Donald Trump's name emblazoned on buildings in brass or gold, it's likely a licensing deal, where he had very little role in the look and feel of the building. But they paid him a dollar amount in order to put his name on the building. That's called a licensing fee. Maybe he manages the building. Maybe he just looked at some of the furniture, fabric, and electrics, and said yeah, I like those, I don't like those. Use this furniture, not that furniture. That's it. But building a building? That means going to a bank, and getting a construction loan, a series of loans at different phases of the building, as it comes out of the ground. Or multiple houses across a plot of land. That he's not known for. Underneath the fraud that created this multi-billionaire is a reasonably commonplace 100 millionaire that has that business underneath. There's a reason that Donald Trump became an anchor or a host of the Celebrity Apprentice. Name for me -- I did this on another hot-take -- name for me -- I'll give you time -- the amount of successful billionaire real estate developers sitting in New York, or other places, that would think to host a reality TV show, or did? None. The reason Donald Trump did, is he was on the balls of his ass financially, having gone through three bankruptcies, including bankrupting a casino in Atlantic City, and being put on an allowance by the bankruptcy judge, and so he didn't have that much money. He had grandiose theories about himself, and mythology about himself, and big spending habits for him and his family, but a billionaire? A multi-billionaire? A Forbes 400 billionaire? No way. So that's the fraud, right? The avarice and greed of Donald Trump? Underneath it he's a 100 millionaire. But he doesn't like that, so he pumps it up 10 times, 50 times, 100 times, on his financial statement, and he did it -- let me give the example of Mar-a-Lago, once and for all from somebody that's actually visited Mar-a-Lago.

Salty our producer, can we get arrows? Okay. I've been there, and I remember the deal, because I lived in Palm Beach County when this happened. And I watched it. Mar-a-Lago was sort of a falling down mansion, right? -- like a Gray Gardens type mansion -- that was owned, I think, by the Post family, if I'm getting my numbers right, my math right. Palm Beach, the island of Palm Beach, the municipality of Palm Beach, which is on the beach itself, didn't know what to do with it. And Donald Trump came in, and for like no money -- I forget the purchase price, but it was really low I don't know if it was 5 million or 10 million. [10 million] I think it was even less than that. And he wanted to live there, but he also wanted to redevelop it as a club. It wasn't a club, it was a private home. And Palm Beach County has a bunch of clubs, and they didn't really want anymore. And they didn't want him living at it. So he had to make a series of commitments -- deed restrictions -- in the development of Mar-a-Lago, in order to get approved to live there. If he didn't, if he just wanted to tear it down, and put up something else, he probably could have put up a single family mansion. You know, it's 15 acres, so it was a big piece of property. But they weren't going to let him put like 15 homes on there. I mean, they might have at the time, 40 years ago, maybe, but he didn't want to do that. He wanted to keep the mansion, he wanted to do it on the cheap -- refurbish it as a club private club, and then live in it. And they were like "eh, living in it, we don't like the living in it part." Palm Beach County and Palm Beach itself, the city, and he, agreed to a bunch of deed restrictions about the development of the property, which lowered tremendously the ultimate value of that property. Indeed, restrictions in the real estate world, we say, it runs with the land. You can't get rid of them. And you can't get rid of, it's very hard to get rid of zoning and land use restrictions that you've agreed on as a condition of letting you buy the building. And that's what Palm Beach is all hot and bothered about. Palm Beach's current council, or commissioner, was probably like "thank God he's not coming before us right now, there's no way we would agree to do any of these things." The only way for that piece of 15 acres, which is arguably, you know, near the beach, and valuable, to have the value ascribed to it by Donald Trump and his lawyers, who don't know real estate at all, in their opening statement, would be if there were no deed restrictions, and no conservation easements. Meaning, Donald Trump got a tremendous tax break, because he said most of the 15 acres was going to be conserved as green space, not developed, which was a big sigh of relief to people in Palm Beach, because this isle of Palm Beach, they all have like gazillion dollar, tens of millions of dollars of homes. And they didn't want 15 new homes to come on the market, developed by Donald Trump, with a giant black and gold Donald Trump sign, and they certainly didn't want a tower of, you know, 30 40, 50 stories of condos, with hundreds of condominiums flooding the market, lowering their property value, and putting lots of people on the roads and infrastructure of Palm Beach. I mean they like their little enclave. And there used to be a joke that if they could roll up -- there's a two bridges that go between Palm Beach, the island, the rich enclave, sort of the Beverly Hills of that area, and West Palm Beach, where the working class lived and worked, that they could roll up the bridges at night, they would. But they can't. That's why, if you go to Palm Beach itself, the municipal beach, there's no place to go to the bathroom. There's no place to get a sandwich or a soda. Because they don't want the public to be there soiling their beaches, spoiling their pristine beaches. They want to walk out of their condos, or their houses, go to the beach, and go back, and not have to see anybody. And so that's the place that said, "you want to live there, that's weird. You got to give us all these restrictions." And that lowers the value.

Yes, I will agree with Alina Habba, that if you could use the property for its highest and best use, without regard to zoning law, land use law, deed restrictions, tax restrictions, and easements -- just all those things -- and you could develop the property freely, for whatever the land use and zoning -- or no land use and zoning -- would allow you, if you could just cram 30 houses on there to develop -- even though there's at least a one acre requirement per building lot -- if you could just put up a hundred story building in the middle of Palm Beach County -- although you never could -- if you could do all of that, it could be worth a billion dollars. Or if -- to use her phrase in the opening statement -- there's a buyer for it at a billion dollars -- that's real estate, not fraud. No, that's fraud. Because if anybody's paying a billion dollars for a property that's worth 50 million, then they're hoping that Donald Trump gets back into office, and they're trying to curry favor, and that's what Judge Engoron said in his summary judgment ruling in favor of the New York attorney general just last Tuesday, finding at the heart of the case that there has a been persistent fraud perpetrated by Donald Trump, and all the others, for years, that's put hundreds of millions of dollars in his pocket. It overinflated his net worth by billions of dollars. And he said, "yes" -- in a footnote -- "you might be able to find the hypothetical Saudi Arabian, or somebody from Dubai, or somebody from China, to buy the property at some rate that's not tied to the market, not tied to the buy and sell of the market, but that probably would be for influence pedaling, and influence buying, more than property value."

And that's where we are.

So there's two different Mar-a-Lagos. There's the fantasy Mar-a-Lago of Donald Trump, and his lawyers' creation, that exists in a universe of his own, without a town council, or commissioner, making land use and zoning regulations. Without a land use and zoning map. Or book, or code, that governs and regulates land use and zoning in Palm Beach County. Without a master plan, as they call it in Florida. Without deed restrictions that you've agreed to in order to live on the property. Without -- you can see all the things I've got to leave out -- without conservation easements that you've granted in order to lower your taxes, and promise that you'll keep the green space. If you could get that, if you had all of that, sure, 15 Acres in Palm Beach County, a prime location, not right on the beach, but off the beach, sure, it has value. It's probably several hundred million dollars.

I'll give you an example. 10 years ago a piece of dirt, just dirt, and this is 10 years ago, in Miami, off Brickle, on the water, to be used for a giant Tower, went for $50 million. And then they put a giant gazillion dollar building on it 70 stories high, and made themselves a billion dollars. So $50 million didn't really mean much. So yes, if you could develop 15 acres, without regard to law, zoning easements, deed restrictions, or anything else, it could be worth a lot more money than what it's currently worth. But then if you layer back on all of the restrictions I've just outlined, which which reduce, reduce, reduce the value, the use of the property, the appraised value of the property, down, down, down, then you're down to the 50 or 60 or $70 million, or whatever it is that the New York attorney general has subscribed to it. I'm not going down as low as the 18 or 20 million that the Palm Beach County Tax Assessor's office has assigned to it, cuz I'll be frank -- I lived in Palm Beach County. I've had houses that have been assessed. And in in Miami Dade County, the property assessor is usually behind the market. The market is usually a bit hotter than the property assessor. It could be off by up to 50%. But that's not what the New York attorney general is saying. We're not using the appraised value. And Engoron is saying, "I'm not using the appraised value of the assessor's office." They're using other math that gets it to about 50 to 60 million -- maybe 70 million tops. But not 780 million, right? Not the entire amount that Fox News just paid Dominion voting machines for their defamation. That amount. That's the amount of the miss between the value of what the property is really worth, of what Donald Trump and his people, in their opening statement, say it's worth.

And that's the fraud, right? Because he didn't want to be a 100 millionaire. He wanted to be a multi-billionaire, and beat his daddy. Because his daddy was a 100 millionaire -- Freddy Trump, right? -- when they were performing their own frauds back then. But that didn't content him. And since he had all his financial ruins, and all his financial difficulties, and his bankruptcies, he had to take the Celebrity Apprentice job to pump up his brand, to emblazon it, and stick it on buildings, on licensing deals -- not construction deals -- not development deals. And that is the fraud, and the PT Barnum, and the Bamboozle, of Donald Trump. And it always has been. And people that live and work in New York, that know him, and know people that know him, know that. It's just the American people who didn't know it, because he didn't let them know it. Because he didn't let them have his tax returns, or any of his financial disclosures, before he ran. There's a reason for that.

Think back. Why didn't Donald Trump, why wasn't he more transparent about his finances when he ran? We're seeing why he wasn't. Because it was all a big giant house of cards, a Ponzi scheme, built up on defrauding banks, and making them give him more money, to pump up his net worth than it was really worth.

I'm tired of hearing about Mar-a-Lago, and the property that exists in Donald Trump's mind, freed of any restrictions, zoning law, land use law, Master plans, easements, conservation easements, or anything else, where he can just, in a fantasy world, put up a 100 story tower, like he's developing in Dubai, and not on the Isle of Palm Beach. Or he can develop hundreds of houses in a place where you can only develop, tops, probably about ten.

So don't you be fooled. I'm not going to blow smoke or sunshine on hot-takes. I bring them to you about every hour on the Meidastouch Network, exclusively, one place, right here. And then on Wednesdays and Saturdays, if you didn't already know, I co-founded and co-anchor the leading podcast at the intersection -- talk about real estate -- the valuable corner of law, justice, and politics. I do it with co-anchors Saturday and Wednesdays. We put it on audio podcast platforms. And you can follow me on all things social media at MsPopok.

Until the next hot-take, till the next Legal AF, this is Michael Popok, reporting.

[admin]

The "Trump Brand Premium", Excerpt from Decision + Order on Motions [for summary judgment]
People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Donald Trump, et al.
Case No. 452564/2022
by Judge Arthur F. Engoron, J.S.C.
9/26/23

The "Trump Brand Premium"

The evidence indicates that for the years 2013-2020, the SFCs relied on values that included a 15% or 30% "premium" based on the "Trump brand" for the following seven golf clubs: Trump National Golf Course ("TNGC" ) Jupiter, TNGC LA, TNGC Colts Neck, TNGC Philadelphia, TNGC DC, TNGC Charlotte, and TNOC Hudson Valley. NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 783-790. However, the SFCs for those years (and, indeed, all the years before this Court), also contained express language stating: "The goodwill attached to the Trump name has significant value that has not been reflected in the preparation of this financial statement." NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 769-779 (emphasis added). Accordingly, the SFCs "double dip," both purporting not to include a brand premium while simultaneously including one of 15% or 30%.

In opposition, defendants submit the affidavit of Eli Bartov, an accounting professor at New York University, who distinguishes between overall brand value and brand value ascribed to individual golf courses. His point, ensconced in numerous lines of academic jargon, seems to be that defendants said that they were eschewing the former and opting only for the latter. NYSCEF Doc. No. 1378 at 14-15. This is a red herring and factually incorrect. The SFCs clearly state that they do not include a brand value for any of the properties included in the SFCs; indeed, the SFCs emphatically declare that "[t]he goodwill attached to the Trump name has significant financial value that has not been reflected in the preparation of this financial statement." NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 769-779 (emphasis added). Perhaps Donald Trump could have ascribed a brand value to golf courses that he viewed as "special," but he was obligated to disclose those exceptions when he represented that the SFCs did not reflect his brand value.

[admin]

Ex-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg’s Testimony Abruptly Ended After Forbes Story Accused Him of Perjury: A source close to New York Attorney General Letitia James confirmed that her office is looking into the latest report about the former Trump CFO's testimony
by Adam Klasfeld
TheMessengerPolitics
Published 10/12/23 04:41 PM ET|Updated 10/12/23 05:22 PM ET

The Trump Organization’s former chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg’s testimony reached an abrupt and unexpected end on Thursday afternoon, just hours after Forbes magazine accused the convicted tax cheat of perjuring himself during an earlier stint as a witness.

Weisselberg insisted on Tuesday from the witness stand that he “never focused” on calculating the square footage of the former president’s Trump Tower triplex, a three-floor penthouse in his namesake skyscraper.

Two days later, on Thursday, Forbes reported that emails not currently in the attorney general’s possession show otherwise.

A source close to New York Attorney General Letitia James confirmed that her office is looking into the latest Forbes report.

Hours after the publication of that story, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron convened a sidebar with attorneys for the state and defense, but the subject of their private huddle remains unknown. Weisselberg was excused for the day shortly after that conversation, as attorneys for both sides reserved the right to call him back.

On Tuesday, Weisselberg kept trying to distance himself from Trump’s false computation of his triplex at 30,000 square feet instead of 10,996 square feet, repeatedly claiming “never” to have focused on the topic.

Forbes senior editor Dan Alexander wrote that his old emails and reporter notes contradict those denials, pointing out in his story that "Weisselberg absolutely thought about Trump’s apartment—and played a key role in trying to convince Forbes over the course of several years that it was worth more than it really was."

"Given the fact that these discussions continued for years, and that Weisselberg took a very detailed approach in reviewing Trump’s assets with Forbes, it defies all logic to think he truly believes what he is now saying in court," Alexander added.

Earlier this week, Trump attacked Alexander by name on Truth Social, labeling him a “psycho” and his news organization a “rag" after it dropped the former president from its world billionaires list for the second time in three years.

Those Trump social media comments were also posted hours after James entered a series of Forbes’ fact-checking emails with Weisselberg and other executives into evidence. Alexander, whose byline appeared on the story knocking Trump off Forbes’ billionaires list, was one of the staffers who sent those emails.

[admin]

Trump’s Longtime CFO Lied, Under Oath, About Trump Tower Penthouse
by Dan Alexander
Senior editor at Forbes, covering Donald Trump's business.
Oct 12, 2023,11:04am EDT

In trying to distance himself from Donald Trump’s false financial statements, Allen Weisselberg kept lying.

Allen Weisselberg, the longtime chief financial officer of the Trump Organization, lied in sworn testimony on Tuesday when questioned about Donald Trump’s penthouse atop Trump Tower.

Weisselberg was on the stand as part of a $250 million lawsuit that the New York attorney general is waging against Trump and his associates, including Weisselberg, accusing them of lying about Trump’s net worth to financial institutions. To arrive at inflated figures, the Trump Organization used demonstrably incorrect facts, such as valuing Trump’s penthouse as if it contained 30,000 square feet, when it in fact consisted of 10,996.

Under questioning, Weisselberg acknowledged that the 30,000-square-foot figure was wrong. He tried to suggest, however, that he had little to do with the bogus calculation, batting away a series of questions about the financial documents and discussions with Forbes, which has been valuing Trump’s fortune since 1982. “I never focused on the triplex, to be honest with you,” Weisselberg said. “It was almost de minimis relative to his net worth, so I really didn’t focus on it.”

He repeated similar lines as his testimony continued. “I never focused on the apartment Mr. Trump owned,” he said at one point. At another: “I didn’t correlate the square footage of Donald’s apartment. I never focused on it. It was always in my mind a de minimis asset of the overall of Donald J. Trump’s statement of financial condition. That was never a concern of mine. I never even thought about the apartment. It was de minimis in my mind.”

But that’s not true. A review of old emails and notes, some of which the attorney general’s office does not possess, show that Weisselberg absolutely thought about Trump’s apartment—and played a key role in trying to convince Forbes over the course of several years that it was worth more than it really was. Given the fact that these discussions continued for years, and that Weisselberg took a very detailed approach in reviewing Trump’s assets with Forbes, it defies all logic to think he truly believes what he is now saying in court.

The saga started in 2009, on a relatively friendly note. Forbes had been valuing Trump’s fortune for decades at that point, though some of his smaller assets remained absent from the overall calculation. Weisselberg and Trump summoned a Forbes reporter to a meeting, according to the reporter’s notes. The reporter was hesitant to add Trump’s personal home to the valuation, something Trump and his underlings seemed to be okay with at the time. “They understand if we don’t want to include the penthouse at Trump Tower,” the reporter noted.

Three years later, in 2012, a different reporter wrote, “Allen asked why we count large private estates for other billionaires and not Trump. He said we should be including his NY penthouse. He thinks it’s worth more [than] $88m.” Weisselberg had a point. The penthouse wasn’t worth $88 million, but it was worth something. The reporter added it to the calculation with an estimated $64 million valuation.

Weisselberg kept pushing. The next year, a reporter explained, “Now Allen says it’s worth $200M, and there’s no debt.” Believing the penthouse was nearly 30,000 square feet, the figure that the Trump Organization would eventually claim on its internal documents, the reporter decided to bump up the estimate to $90 million.

A year later, in 2014, Weisselberg once again weighed in on the value. “Now Allen says it’s $163m with 0 debt,” a reporter wrote in her notes. “He is sending us sales records for One57”—a luxury apartment building nearby, which Trump’s financial statements also referenced—“and then applying a per-square-foot rate, based on 30k sf.”

The reporter opted to leave the valuation at $90 million in her calculation and sent a summary of her estimates to Weisselberg and his deputy, Jeff McConney. Weisselberg then set up a phone call, which was followed by an email exchange, titled “Mr. Trump’s penthouse.” “Hi Jeff, Allen— I just wanted to let you know that I was not able to bump up the value of Mr. Trump’s penthouse this time. While I understand your point that it may indeed sell for more than $90 million due to its large square footage, this is still an untested market. Since no apartment in New York is known to have sold for more than that sum to date, we’re not comfortable upping the number at this time.” Weisselberg replied at 5:02 p.m. on a September Friday, delving into the weeds on the penthouse. “Thank you for the response, but keep in mind that his apartment is a triplex which consists of 6 apartments.”

In 2015, Trump hosted three Forbes journalists inside Trump Tower, with Weisselberg by his side. “This is the entire floor of Trump Tower, just so you know,” Trump said, showing off his penthouse. “Now, this wraps all around the building. All around the elevators. And I have three times three. So there’s like 11,000 feet on a floor. So I have three. So 33,000—and I have the roof.”

The next year, Forbes uncovered property records that showed that the penthouse was only 10,996 square feet, not 30,000 square feet or 33,000 square feet. Reporters reached out to Weisselberg and others at the Trump Organization to ask about the discrepancy, emails that are now being used as evidence in the case.

Even after receiving those messages, the Trump Organization apparently continued to value the penthouse on its documents as if it had 30,000 square feet. It wasn’t until after Forbes published a story in May 2017, exposing the lie publicly, that the Trump Organization seemed to change its internal documents, reducing the square footage to 10,996.

Weisselberg was demoted from his role as CFO after he was criminally charged in a separate tax case in 2021. He remained with the Trump Organization until January, when he was sentenced to five months in jail as the result of the other case, which also implicated the Trump Organization. Weisselberg signed a separation agreement with the firm that month, which promises to pay him $2 million over two years, if he complies with his obligations under the agreement.

An attorney for Weisselberg did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Weisselberg is expected to retake the stand in the attorney general’s case to continue his testimony in the coming days.

[admin]

Executive at Donald Trump’s company says ‘presidential premium’ was floated to boost bottom line
by Michael R. Sisak
AP
Updated 8:57 PM MDT, October 13, 2023

Adam Klasfeld
@Klasfeld Reports
The latest examples come from notations on Trump's 2017 statement of financial condition.
One involves this math:
"35% Premium
Ex-President?
would give $27 million"
Another: "25% Premium for Presidential Personal Residence."
8:59 AM Oct 13, 2023

NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump’s top corporate deputies considered adding a “presidential premium” when calculating the value of his Trump Tower penthouse, Mar-a-Lago resort and other assets during his White House years, a gambit that would’ve padded his net worth by nearly $145 million, an executive at the former president’s company testified Friday.

Trump Organization Assistant Vice President Patrick Birney said at Trump’s New York civil fraud trial that they ended up scrapping the idea, but state lawyers contend that merely going through the exercise underscores how Trump and his underlings were intent on finding ways to puff up his net worth.

Trump was expected to return to court for the trial next week when fixer-turned-foe Michael Cohen was scheduled to take the witness stand, though Cohen said late Friday that he needed to attend to a medical condition that might delay the showdown. Cohen said he would testify “at the earliest opportunity.”

Birney was testifying at the end of the second week of a non-jury trial in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ fraud lawsuit. He is the third Trump Organization executive to take the witness stand, following former Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg and Senior Vice President and former Controller Jeffrey McConney.

***********************

Trump uses presidential seal at N.J. golf club amid ethics complaints
by Mariana Alfaro, Rick Maese and Ellen Francis
Washington Post
Updated July 29, 2022 at 11:24 a.m. EDT|Published July 29, 2022 at 6:23 a.m. EDT


Former president Donald Trump's golf bag and towel are seen during the pro-am of the LIV Golf tournament at his club in Bedminster, N.J. (Seth Wenig/AP)

Former president Donald Trump was spotted using the presidential seal on multiple items during the LIV Golf tournament at his Bedminster, N.J., golf course.

The seal was plastered on towels, golf carts and other items as the former president participated in the pro-am event of the Saudi-sponsored tournament Thursday.

It is against federal law to use the presidential and vice-presidential seals in ways that could convey “a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States.”

While violating this law could result in imprisonment of “not more than six months,” a fine or both, these punishments are rarely doled out.


The presidential seal is emblazoned on this golf cart cover. (Justin Lane/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock)

This is not the first time the display of the seal has been reported at Trump properties. The logo appeared on a marker at his golf course in West Palm Beach, Fla., in an Instagram post earlier this year, according to Forbes. WNYC and ProPublica reported in 2018 that the Trump Organization ordered golf course tee markers with the emblem on them.

edruf
Trump International Golf Club Palm Beach
45th President 45 yards from hole on 18

Last year, a D.C.-based watchdog group accused his Bedminster golf club of profiting from using images of the presidential seal.

“Unlawful use of the presidential seal for commercial purposes is no trivial matter, especially when it involves a former president who is actively challenging the legitimacy of the current president,” Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said when it filed the 2021 complaint.


A viewing room in a tent at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., on July 27. (Justin Lane/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock)

As Trump teed off Thursday in the pro-am at the latest LIV Golf Invitational Series tournament, the event was closed to the public but open to media.

This week marks the third event of the Saudi-funded LIV Golf series, with which Trump has joined forces in Bedminster in the face of criticism, and its second in the United States.

The former president was asked whether he had any regrets that the golf club was hosting a LIV Golf event rather than a tournament sanctioned by the U.S. Golf Association or PGA Tour.

“No, no regrets. That’s their problem,” he said. “This course blows every other course away.”

Trump has faced criticism from the survivors of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and their family members for hosting the Saudi-backed golf tournament at his New Jersey resort — 50 miles from Ground Zero.

In an ad released this week, family members of those who lost their lives in the attacks hold up photos of their deceased loved ones while sharing the pain they still endure more than 20 years later.

“How much money to turn your back on your own country?” one woman asks.

The golf tour is funded by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, whose chairman is Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. U.S. intelligence has deemed him responsible for the murder of Washington Post contributing columnist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul in 2018.

On Thursday, Trump dismissed criticism that he is being too friendly to Saudi Arabia.

“Nobody’s gotten to the bottom of 9/11, unfortunately,” Trump told ESPN.

Families of 9/11 victims, many of whom protested Trump’s golf event this week, suspect that Saudi leaders provided financial and logistical support to the terrorism plot, accusations that country’s government has long denied.

The FBI last year released a list of documents from its investigation into whether agents of the Saudi Arabian government provided support to the plot. While the documents have not yielded tangible proof of official involvement of the Saudi government in the attacks, most of the 9/11 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia.

The documents showed that as recently as 2016, FBI agents were still investigating possible ties between two of the hijackers, Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar, and people who may have helped them after they arrived in the United States in 2000.

[admin]

Mar-a-Lago was only worth $27M despite Trump Org. claiming $517M to gain edge: trial evidence
by Priscilla DeGregory
New York Post
Published Oct. 30, 2023, 4:32 p.m. ET

Donald Trump’s tax broker was forced to admit to authorities in 2020 that Mar-a-Lago had a market value of just $27 million — not the $517 million claimed in other documents, trial evidence revealed Monday.

Trump, 77, also allegedly boasted of having a net worth of up to $5 billion — likely more than double what he really had — to land the coveted lease to a New York City golf course in 2010, according to documents.

The revelations came during the fifth week of New York state’s $250 million Manhattan Supreme Court civil fraud case against the former president, whose sons Don Jr. and Eric are set to testify this week.

Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump was scheduled to take the stand in the case Friday, but her testimony has been postponed until Nov. 8 because of a scheduling conflict, ABC News reported Monday.

Trump is still scheduled to testify Nov. 6.

During Monday’s testimony, an email was shown from Trump tax representative Michael Corbiciero revealing he’d tried to appeal the Palm Beach County assessor’s appraisal of his boss’s famed Florida golf club Mar-a-Largo.

But Corbiciero eventually gave up and finally agreed the estate was worth $26.6 million — even though it had been valued at $517 million on an annual business statement, the outlet reported.

“Was it your understanding that the appeal was withdrawn because the Trump Organization agreed with the value of the property assessor?” Andrew Amer — a lawyer with New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office — asked former Trump Organization Vice President Raymond Flores about the $27 million valuation.

“Yes,” Flores acknowledged.

In fact, from 2011 through 2021, Trump had valued the property at between $426 million to $612 million on annual statements of financial condition — which a judge ruled last month was “at least 2,300%” more than the local official’s valuation. In the same ruling, the judge found Trump liable of fraud in some instances and revoked his business licenses in New York as the rest of his case continues.

Flores testified Monday about receiving the Nov. 17, 2021, correspondence from Corbiciero — a then-senior consultant at Marvin F Power and Company — in which he explained the benefits that categorizing Mar-a-Lago as a residence rather than a social club would have on taxes.

Corbiciero explained in the email — which Flores forwarded to to ex-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and Executive Vice President Eric Trump — that Mar-a-Lago could be valued at close to 10 times its assessed value if it was classified as a residence.

Illegally ballooning the value of Trump’s holdings gained him favorable loan and insurance rates, among other things, netting him several hundred million dollars, state prosecutors say.

“Last year, we briefly discussed the possibility of filing for a homestead exemption on the Mar-a-Lago property since President Donald Trump had legally declared Palm Beach and the Mar-a-Lago property as his personal residence,” the email read, according to a report by the Independent.

The email went on to explain that the property would have to “meet certain requirements” for the exemption, including that Trump Org. would need to transfer ownership of the Florida estate to Trump personally.

In the wake of Judge Arthur Engoron’s bombshell ruling from last month, Trump has maintained that the Palm Beach property is worth far more than the assessor pegged it at — claiming its value is as much as $1.5 billion.

The second witness on Monday, David Cerron — an assistant commissioner in the New York City Parks and Recreation Department — also testified that when the agency awarded the Trump Organization the rights to run a city golf course in Ferry Point Park in 2010, Trump had declared his net worth at $3 billion and said he had $200 million of cash on hand, ABC News reported.

Trump had to continue to tell the Parks Department what his worth was for the next decade so that city officials felt confident it would remain solvent — and one year, he claimed it was as much as $4.9 billion, according to evidence shown in court.

The AG’s office has claimed that Trump never had more than $2.1 billion during this time period.

Cerron said these financial disclosures were necessary “to be sure, as we would always, that the operator in place had the funds to deliver on their obligations.”

AG lawyer Sherief Gaber asked, “Would the Department of Parks and Recreation expect this representation to be true, complete, and accurate?”

“Yes,” Cerron responded.

But during cross-examination by Trump lawyer Jennifer Hernandez, Cerron admitted that Trump’s net worth “was the lowest” consideration in granting him the rights to the golf course and that experience and plans were weighed more heavily.

Hernandez also noted that Trump never missed payments or other obligations under the licensing agreement.

Bally’s bought out the licensing agreement from the Trump Organization in 2020 when the city sought to distance itself from the Trump empire after the Jan. 6 Capital Riot.

AG James claims in her suit against Trump, his two eldest sons and the family real-estate company that for at least 10 years Trump inflated his assets to the tune of billions of dollars per year to get better loan and insurance terms.

Trump, who is running for president again in 2024, has adamantly denied the claims and said he is the victim of a political witch hunt.

[admin]

Donald Trump has worst day yet in NY civil fraud trial as underling's scribbled note ties him to conspiracy
by Laura Italiano
Business Insider
Nov 21, 2023, 3:30 PM MST
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-w ... ss-2023-11

[x]
Donald Trump at a campaign event in Ohio and key evidence in his New York fraud trial. Gaelen Morse/Reuters, left. Insider, right.

** The Trump civil fraud trial is now in its eighth week in New York.
** The defense called Donald Trump's former spreadsheet czar Jeffrey McConney to testify.
** McConney said he wrote "DJT TO GET FINAL REVIEW" on a document the state alleges is fraud-filled.

Donald Trump had his worst day yet in his ongoing civil fraud trial in New York on Tuesday at the hands of his own key witness, a former Trump Organization executive who linked the former president directly to the fuzzy math at the center of the case.

The witness was Jeffrey McConney, who was the comptroller and spreadsheet czar at the Trump Org. McConney had been called to the witness stand by the defense, but on cross-examination by lawyers for the state attorney general's office Tuesday, he linked Trump firmly to the conspiracy and fraud counts that have yet to be decided in the non-jury trial.

McConney was handed People's Exhibit 3054, a draft of Trump's net-worth statement for 2014. He was asked to look at a note scribbled in thin blue ink on the draft's first page, "DJT TO GET FINAL REVIEW," which he said he'd written.

[x]
A handwritten note that links Donald Trump to the counts in his NY fraud trial. NY attorney general's office/Insider

Trump has denied involvement in preparing a decade's worth of these annual net-worth statements, which New York's attorney general, Letitia James, has alleged — and the trial judge has agreed — were each year riddled with billions of dollars of exaggerations.

The AG has alleged the net-worth statement that McConney was handed the draft for, from 2014, contained $3.5 billion in exaggerations.

[x]
Jeffrey McConney, a former comptroller for Donald Trump. Seth Wenig/AP

"Donald Trump would get final review?" Andrew Amer, the state's lawyer, asked McConney.

"That was my understanding, yes," McConney answered from the witness stand, his voice gruff.

[x]
Trump attending his New York civil fraud trial. Pool/Getty Images

Amer asked next whether Trump would get the final review of every net-worth statement until leaving for the White House in 2017, after which Eric Trump would approve the drafts.

"That was my understanding, yes," McConney answered again. Asked whether that was his handwriting on the drafts — the thin blue pen marks — McConney also said yes, it was.

Why the spreadsheet czar's scribbles matter

McConney's testimony was significant for several reasons — not just the damage it did to Trump, but the damage it did to Trump's two eldest sons; to the Trump Org's former chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg; and to McConney himself.

The three Trumps and the two ex-executives are all defendants in the AG's lawsuit, which alleges that Trump used net-worth exaggerations to win hundreds of millions of dollars in interest-rate discounts and property-sale profits. James is seeking at least $250 million in penalties and to bar the five defendants from ever running a New York business again.

[x]
Trump talking to reporters outside the courtroom during his civil fraud trial in New York. AP Photo/Seth Wenig

Starting with the damage to McConney himself, his blue-ink notations directly contradict his testimony from the prior day.

The spreadsheet czar had testified on direct examination Monday that he would review each year's draft net-worth statement with Weisselberg, who would then give the approved draft to the outside accounting firm, Mazars USA, which would print the final statement.

This chain of command — McConney to Weisselberg to Mazars — leaves out one very important link, as the state's lawyer, Amer, pointed out on cross on Tuesday.

"I believe there was a step in between that involved Donald Trump prior to 2017?" Amer said to McConney, who appeared uncomfortable on the stand as he said Trump indeed did the ultimate signing off.

Trump, who has not attended the trial for the past two weeks, had said on the witness stand on November 6 that he had little involvement in the drafting of these net-worth statements. In a pretrial deposition, he denied knowing who had written "DJT to get final review" on that 2014 draft.

[x]
An excerpt from Donald Trump's pretrial deposition in his NY civil fraud case. NY Attorney General's Office/Insider

But McConney's blue-ink handwriting is all over the net-worth statement drafts, showing he revised language and even added cautionary notes that were then passed along for Trump's "final review," as McConney said in his own description of the drafting process.

In one key cautionary note from the 2015 draft, McConney made a notation in ink that "this computation also includes forecasted deals that have not signed yet." In the note, McConney asked whether Trump wanted to exclude some $151 million in as-yet-fictional assets from the net-worth statement.

The final version of that year's net-worth statement shows McConney's suggestion was ignored, possibly by Trump himself. The AG alleges that Trump routinely padded out his net-worth statements with the same sorts of nonexistent assets.

[x]
"Do you want to delete these deals?" Trump was asked in a handwritten note warning of $151 million in "forecasted" deals. NY Attorney General's Office/Insider

McConney's many handwritten notes indicate it was Trump and his top executives who made the last edits and then signed off on these net-worth statements. As such, the notes do serious damage to the primary Trump defense: blame Mazars, blame the accountants.

The attorney general's office also appears poised to argue that these handwritten notes show McConney, Weisselberg, and Trump intentionally conspired in cooking the numbers each year. Intent and conspiracy are two elements that must be proved for the attorney general to win all six of the yet-decided counts in the case.

Still to be proved or disproved: conspiracy and intent

New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron has already found, pretrial, that Trump's 2014-through-2021 statements fraudulently inflated his wealth.

The trial is meant to determine whether the five defendants further broke six specific state laws: falsifying business records, filing false financial statements, insurance fraud, and conspiracy to commit each of these counts. These six counts all require proof that the frauds and falsehoods were committed intentionally.

Since the case is civil, not criminal, the judge will not issue a "guilty" verdict. Instead, his verdict will find whether the five defendants are "liable" for monetary and other penalties for violating these six laws.

How else do McConney's handwritten notes harm the defense?

The fact that these incriminating, hand-scrawled drafts were turned over to authorities by Mazars but not by the Trump Organization could come up at the end of the trial as evidence that Trump's side failed to retain and turn over documents as required by state subpoenas.

McConney's cross-examination came minutes after a dramatic, tearful conclusion to his direct testimony.

The longtime Trump executive became weepy in answering the final question from the defense lawyer Jesus Suarez, who asked why he'd left the Trump Organization after 35 years working there.

He left to "stop being accused of misrepresenting assets for the company that I loved working for," he said, wiping away tears as he described a history of being subpoenaed on the federal and state level in connection with the Trump Organization.

"It was like working with family," he said. "I feel proud of what I did."

The trial continues Monday with testimony expected by the chief accounting officer for Trump Hotels, Mark Hawthorn. It will be the ninth week of trial and the third week of the defense case.

[admin]

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef ... tzC9ofmw==

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
NEW YORK COUNTY

PRESENT: HON. ARTHUR F. ENGORON

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BY LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,

Plaintiff,

-v-

DONALD J. TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JR., ERIC TRUMP, ALLEN WEISSELBERG, JEFFREY MCCONNEY, THE DONALD J. TRUMP REVOCABLE TRUST, THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION INC. TRUMP ORGANIZATION LLC DJT HOLDINGS LLC, DJIT HOLDINGS MANAGING MEMBER, TRUMP ENDEAVOR 12 LLC, 401 NORTH WABASH VENTURE LLC, TRUMP OLD POST OFFICE LLC 40 WALL STREET LLC SEVEN SPRINGS LLC.,

Defendants.

PART: 37
INDEX NO. 452564/2022

Decision and Order Denying Defendants' Motions for a Directed Verdict

At least five times during the recently concluded ten-and-a-half week trial of this matter, defendants moved for a directed verdict. The first such time was at the close of plaintiff's case, which is when defendants normally move for such relief. This court took that motion, and most of the others, under advisement. It denied two of them on the spot. At the close of plaintiff's rebuttal case, defendants requested permission to move, yet again, pursuant to CPLR 4401, for a directed verdict. Plaintiff opposed the request. Not wanting to impose an undue prior restraint, this Court granted the request. The instant letter-motion ensued. This Court hereby denies that motion and, furthermore, denies all the prior motions that the Court previously took under advisement.1

Rather than marshal and detail, yet again, the evidence in support of plaintiff's prima facie case, and defendants' failure to do more than raise issues of fact, this court will highlight some of the fatal flaws in the instant motion.

The most glaring flaw is to assume that the testimony of defendants' experts, notably Messrs. Jason Flemmons and Eli Bartov, is true and accurate, or at least that the Court, as the trier of fact, will accept it as true and accurate. Bartov is a tenured professor, but all that his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say. His overarching point was that the subject statements of financial condition were accurate in every respect. As this Court discussed in excruciating detail in its September 26, 2023 summary judgment decision, the Statements of Financial Condition ("SFCs") contained numerous obvious errors. By doggedly attempting to justify every misstatement, Professor Bartov lost all credibility.2

Mr. Flemmons acknowledged that he had never valued property, much less was he a valuation "expert," but he attempted to opine on values. The crux of Mr. Flemmons' testimony was that so long as defendants selected one of the "methods" that ASC 274 permits, then any numbers may be entered into such methodology, regardless of their accuracy or relationship to reality.

Mr. Flemmons also, inexplicably, acknowledged that future income had to be discounted to present value on a financial statement, while at the same time stating there were no Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP") departures where defendants failed to apply a discount rate to future income. He opined that Mazars should have followed up on items in the SFCs but then stated, adamantly, that it would have been "highly unusual" for Mazars to make an inquiry for any appraisals in the client's possession.3 He was reluctant to acknowledge that an asset controlled by a third-party cannot be considered "cash," while also acknowledging that it was a "red flag."

Defendants persist in arguing that if a loan closes prior to the period during which the statute of limitations allows suit, then any required follow-up SFCs made during that period is somehow sacrosanct. That contention is belied by a plain reading of Executive Law Section 63(12), by the law of the case doctrine, and, perhaps most importantly, by common sense. Closing is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for future misstatements. All that Section 63(12) requires is a false statement used in business; the subject financial statements fit that definition "to a T."

In their zeal to "protect the record," defendants yet again raise the specter that plaintiff has no standing and no capacity to bring the instant action. This Court has confidence that the Court of Appeals can easily reach and determine those arguments, which personify frivolity.

Defendants' arguments against disgorgement fall short in three respects: disgorgement does not depend on damages (a different concept); the testimony showed that the lenders did rely, in part, on Donald J. Trump's SFCs; and Section 63(12) contemplates disgorgement. Disgorgement is the return of "ill-gotten gains." If you pay a lower interest rate on a loan by overstating the value of any of your assets, thus lowering the perceived risk to the lender, your gains are ill-gotten. The lender has lost money, although the loss is not out-of-pocket, and so the loss is not what the law traditionally thinks of as damages. That the instant lenders made millions of dollars and were happy with the transactions does not mean that they were not damaged by lending at lower interest rates than they otherwise would have. Michiel McCarty's testimony credibly supported this.

Moreover, as this Court details in its September 26, 2023 decision, it is well-settled that the State has an interest in protecting the integrity of the marketplace. People v. Northern Leasing Sys., Inc., 70 Misc 3d 256, 267 (Sup Ct, NY County 2021) (holding that "[a] claim under Executive Law System 63(12) is the exercise of 'the State's regulation of businesses within its borders in the interest of securing an honest marketplace'").

Furthermore, the lenders relied, in part, on the subject financial statements, as was made clear in the testimony of Nicholas Haigh and Michiel McCarty. Indeed, many of the lenders' calculations used the SFCs as their starting point, to which they often applied a standard "haircut."

Defendants also trot out two of their standard canards, that valuations are subjective and that the law only penalizes "material" deviations. These both fall into the category of "Let no one be fooled." Valuations, as elucidated ad nauseum in this trial, can be based on different criteria analyzed in different ways. But a lie is still a lie. Valuing occupied residences as if vacant, valuing restricted land as if unrestricted, valuing an apartment as it were triple its actual size, valuing property many times the amount of concealed appraisals, valuing planned buildings as if completed and ready to rent, valuing golf courses with brand premium while claiming not to, and valuing restricted funds as cash, are not subjective differences of opinion, they are misstatements at best and fraud at worst.

Defendants are correct that discrepancies in amounts must be material to be actionable. However, the evidence in the record is replete with examples of material misstatements: the size of the triplex, the discrepancies between the appraised values and the amounts on the SFCs, the discrepancy in value between restricted property and unrestricted property, the undisclosed addition of brand value, the amount of "cash" that was illiquid, future value listed as present value without discounting to current value, etc.

Finally, defendants attempt to fall back on alleged disclaimers in the SFCs. As analyzed in the September 26, 2023 decision, the words at issue were simply Mazars' practice of ensuring that the issuer was responsible for the accuracy of the statements. They are not disclaimers at all, they are not defendants' statements, and they certainly do not shield defendants from liability; if anything, they expose defendants to liability.

As previously ordered, post-trial briefs are due by January 5, 2024, and closing arguments will be held on January 11, 2024.

Dec 18, 2023

HON. ARTHUR F. ENGORON

DATE: 12/18/2023

Non-Final Disposition

_______________

Notes:

1. One such motion came immediately after the close of the testimony of Michael Cohen, whom defendants wishfully dominated "plaintiff's star witness." In denying that motion, this Court noted that the evidence of wrongdoing already admitted into evidence was voluminous.

2. Dr. Bartov suffered essentially the same fate testifying before the Hon. Barry Ostrager in People v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 65 Misc 3d 1233(A) (Sup Ct, NY County 2019)("the Court rejects Dr. Bartov's expert testimony as unpersuasive and, in the case about the Mobile Bay facility, finds Dr. Bartov's testimony to be flatly contradicted by the weight of the evidence").

3. In any event, there is documentary evidence, previously submitted to the Court on the parties' summary judgment motions, conclusively establishing that Mazars did, in fact, make inquiries for appraisals, and were told there were none. NYSCEF Doc. No. 1262 at 243.