Trump arrives at New York court for his fraud trial

BidenPresident said:
The gains came through lower insurance premiums and better loan conditions, and in his opening statement, Kevin Wallace, an attorney for New York attorney general Letitia James, said the former president was “materially inaccurate” when he would describe his business to insurers and lenders.

“This isn’t business as usual, and this isn’t how sophisticated parties deal with each other,” Wallace said. “These are not victimless crimes.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...er-shutdown-republicans-politics-live-updates
Click to expand...

I wonder if anyone will notice the bank got an appraisal on the properties prior to closing the loan......
 
Jarod said:
You clearly do not understand the Court system or litigation, his companies were found to be guilty in a civil sense
Click to expand...

sorry cuntselor.....there is no such thing as "guilty in a civil sense" under US law......you must have learned that at a banana republic law school......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
sorry cuntselor.....there is no such thing as "guilty in a civil sense" under US law......you must have learned that at a banana republic law school......
Click to expand...

Sure there is. Are you dumb? When you violate a civil code, you can be found guilty of violating it.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
reliance?.......the lack of it is fatal to a fraud claim......
Click to expand...

Silly, show us a citation where NY Law allows fraud if someone chose not to rely on it?

YOU CANT!
Because you are so dumb you make all kinds of STUPID SHIT CLAIMS, then you RUN.

You are like a FOX NEWS commentator.
 
F7c94g0WUAA3G53.jpg

LCdZRMA.jpg
 
floridafan said:
Trump was keeping two sets of books, one for the banks, and another for insurance, and taxes. Possibly even a 3rd set for the IRS.
Click to expand...

According to the PiMP, I can tell the IRS anything I want, as long as they dont rely on it.
 
Jarod said:
You clearly do not understand the Court system or litigation, his companies were found to be guilty in a civil sense, but there was still a need for a trial to determine the punishment. The Judge must base the punishment on facts presented in the trial.

Are you pretending or are you really this dumb?
Click to expand...

So, verdict first, then trial.

It's the Nazi way.

Standard Disclaimer: The simple truth is, No he was not found guiltily - a biased judge made a biased ruling and all the Nazis ejaculated.
 
Jarod said:
This is not new dummy. Been the way it is in such cases since before the U.S. was founded, it comes from the English system.
Click to expand...

Nope, that is only found in the Nazi, Stalinist, and Chinese systems.

You should take a night school introductory law class.

Seriously.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
So, verdict first, then trial.
Click to expand...

Are you this dumb?

No, in this case the Judge, and the APPELLATE court determined there was such clear evidence that no reasonable jury could ever find in Trumps favor. That happens often in Civil Cases... Verdict as a matter of law, THEN trial on what the punishment will be.
 
Jarod said:
Are you this dumb?

No, in this case the Judge, and the APPELLATE court determined there was such clear evidence that no reasonable jury could ever find in Trumps favor. That happens often in Civil Cases... Verdict as a matter of law, THEN trial on what the punishment will be.
Click to expand...

ROFL

You're an idiot.

This is the civil trial, not the penalty phase.

Seriously, you should be embarrassed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top