Trump vows to fight New York AG case 'all the way up to the US Supreme Court'

TOP said:
She's already ruined her career....and her city...No one respects her but you and The View...;)
Click to expand...

Oh look! You found yet another accomplished, educated, intelligent, and powerful Black woman to bash and lie about! Quelle surprise!
rGnhm6A.jpg
 
The Tish and Fani and Nate and Alvin t-shirts are very popular...lol... selling like hotcakes!!
 
T. A. Gardner said:
It's a damn good argument too. No victims, no losses, half-billion-dollar judgement (not a fine since it wasn't a criminal case).
Click to expand...

It is a shit argument.
Let's look at the 8th amendment -
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

There is no bail so that part doesn't apply.
There is no fine so that part doesn't apply.
Monetary judgements are not cruel or unusual.

The judgement is based not on some made up cruel or unusual number but based on the actual profits that Trump made on certain properties. Trump has to give up the profit he made from his fraud. So even if this was a fine it still wouldn't be cruel or unusual.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
It is a shit argument.
Let's look at the 8th amendment -
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

There is no bail so that part doesn't apply.
There is no fine so that part doesn't apply.
Monetary judgements are not cruel or unusual.

The judgement is based not on some made up cruel or unusual number but based on the actual profits that Trump made on certain properties. Trump has to give up the profit he made from his fraud. So even if this was a fine it still wouldn't be cruel or unusual.
Click to expand...

The bail = judgement. The amount of the judgement is in proportion to the harm caused. If you lost $1000 as a result of a contract, then you are entitled to your $1000 back, not $1 million dollars because you think the other party should be punished. That would be seen as "cruel and unusual."

No victim
No loss
No harm
=
No cash

Telling Trump to pony up half-a-billion dollars for no identifiable reason is cruel and unusual punishment.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
The bail = judgement. The amount of the judgement is in proportion to the harm caused. If you lost $1000 as a result of a contract, then you are entitled to your $1000 back, not $1 million dollars because you think the other party should be punished. That would be seen as "cruel and unusual."

No victim
No loss
No harm
=
No cash

Telling Trump to pony up half-a-billion dollars for no identifiable reason is cruel and unusual punishment.
Click to expand...

I suggest you read the actual ruling from the court and stop with your idiotic claims of what is in it.
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/02/nyag-v-trump-verdict-20240216.pdf
In varying contexts, courts have held that a state has a quasi-
sovereign interest in protecting the integrity of the marketplace.”
People v Grasso, 11 NY3d 64, 69 at n 4 (2008); People v Coventry
First LLC, 52 AD3d 345, 346 (1st Dept 2008) (“the claim pursuant
to Executive Law § 63(12) constituted proper exercises of the
State’s regulation of businesses within its borders in the interest of
securing an honest marketplace”); People v Amazon.com, Inc., 550
F Supp 3d 122, 130-131 (SDNY 2021) (“[T]he State’s statutory
interest under § 63(12) encompasses the prevention of either
‘fraudulent or illegal’ business activities
Click to expand...
Timely and total repayment of loans does not extinguish the harm that false statements inflict on
the marketplace. Indeed, the common excuse that “everybody does it” is all the more reason to
strive for honesty and transparency and to be vigilant in enforcing the rules.
Click to expand...

When it comes to the total amount this is how it breaks down
In total, defendants’ fraud saved them approximately $168,040,168 in interest, which shall be
imposed

...
Plaintiff has also argued that without the ill-gotten savings on interest rates, defendants would
not even have been able to invest in the Old Post Office
...
Accordingly, Donald Trump, the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, the Trump Organization,
Inc., Trump Organization LLC, and the Trump Old Post Office LLC are jointly and severally
liable, in the amount of $126,828,600, for the ill-gotten profits Donald Trump netted from the
sale of the Old Post Office.

Similarly, Donald Trump, the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, the Trump Organization, Inc.,
and Trump Organization LLC are jointly and severally liable for disgorgement of the windfall
profits of $60 million attributable to selling Ferry Point to Bally’s
Click to expand...

That is the $354 million that Donald Trump owes in the judgement.
Then from the time of the judgement until it is paid, Trump owes a 9% annual interest rate compounded daily.
Don Jr, Eric and Allan Weisselberg owe another $10 million.

The judge has clearly identified why Trump owes the money. The judge has clearly identified that the state has an interest in making sure there is no fraud in business in NY.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
I suggest you read the actual ruling from the court and stop with your idiotic claims of what is in it.
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/02/nyag-v-trump-verdict-20240216.pdf



When it comes to the total amount this is how it breaks down


That is the $354 million that Donald Trump owes in the judgement.
Then from the time of the judgement until it is paid, Trump owes a 9% annual interest rate compounded daily.
Don Jr, Eric and Allan Weisselberg owe another $10 million.

The judge has clearly identified why Trump owes the money. The judge has clearly identified that the state has an interest in making sure there is no fraud in business in NY.
Click to expand...

So, the judge used what amounts to a combination of weasel words and an a fig leaf to toss his judgement on Trump. In claiming "false statements," it should be clear to any reasonable person that even if what Trump said was false, those granting him loans were sufficiently diligent and / or prescient to recognize the falsehoods and discard them in any resulting decision to loan Trump money.

Without a victim, without a loss, there should be no judgement against someone. That Trump made a profit is further being punished by the court even as no loss by any party was had.
 
The victims in many of Trump's financial crimes are the people. Trump cheated the people out of his fair taxes. The burden for supporting government services falls to the people who pay taxes and fair property taxes. There is always a victim in Trump's crimes. Like Trump University he escaped with so little cost. Or his charity which he used for his piggy bank. Trump left a trail of victims in his wake.
 
ziggy said:
Former President Trump said he will fight the ruling out of New York Attorney General Letitia James’ case "all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary," telling Fox News Digital that "they can’t take away your property before you’ve had a chance to appeal."

Trump, the 2024 presumptive GOP presidential nominee, and his legal team have appealed and requested a stay on his $454 million civil fraud judgment. He is required to post that bond by Monday.

In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, Trump reflected on the merger of his Trump Media & Technology Group — the parent company of Truth Social — which shareholders voted to make a publicly traded entity Friday. The company is worth nearly $8 billion.

Trump also noted he has nearly $500 million in cash and other properties driving massive amounts of money that he said have very little, if any, debt.

"That doesn’t mean I’m going to give money to a rogue and incompetent judge — the puppet of a corrupt attorney general who’s failing with violent crime and migrant crime and whose only purpose in life is attempting to get Trump," Trump told Fox News Digital, referring to New York Judge Arthur Engoron and James.

Trump said Engoron "openly and hostilely disrespects the decision of the appellate division, which ruled in my favor."

"Hopefully they will set the record straight — he has already been overturned four times on this case," Trump said. "A record.

But Trump vowed to fight the judgment through the court system.

"I’ll fight this all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary," Trump told Fox News Digital. "They can’t take away your property before you’ve had a chance to appeal the decision of a Trump-hating, incompetent judge who has been overturned more than any judge in the state."

Trump added: "The business community in New York is being devastated by this decision and businesses are fleeing New York — never to return, because they don’t want this to happen to them. In the meantime, violent crime is flourishing."

Trump’s comments come as a Monday deadline looms to post $454 million. If he does not, James has threatened to begin seizing Trump assets and properties.

Engoron's ruling came after a months-long non-jury trial stemming from James' years-long investigation. James, when campaigning to become attorney general, vowed to "get Trump."

"We’re definitely gonna sue him, we’re gonna be a real pain in the a--," James once told a supporter on video.

Trump lawyers on Monday said that "ongoing diligent efforts have proven that a bond in the judgment’s full amount is a ‘practical impossibility,’" amid attempts to approach about 30 surety companies.

The lawyers said the "enormous magnitude" of the bond requirement, which effectively requires cash reserves approaching $1 billion, is "unprecedented for a private company."

James has pushed back, calling Trump’s request for a stay "extraordinary" and "improper." James has said that Trump should be able to secure the entire value via multiple sureties or offer his real estate holdings as collateral.

But Trump attorney Clifford S. Robert on Thursday sent a letter to the Appellate Division of New York’s Supreme Court, arguing James’ efforts are "unconstitutional."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tr...way-us-supreme-court-deadline-post-454m-looms
Click to expand...

trump has always abused the court system. This comes as no surprise to anyone.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
So, the judge used what amounts to a combination of weasel words and an a fig leaf to toss his judgement on Trump. In claiming "false statements," it should be clear to any reasonable person that even if what Trump said was false, those granting him loans were sufficiently diligent and / or prescient to recognize the falsehoods and discard them in any resulting decision to loan Trump money.

Without a victim, without a loss, there should be no judgement against someone. That Trump made a profit is further being punished by the court even as no loss by any party was had.
Click to expand...

You are completely ignorant of what the circumstances are.

If I take out a loan on a building for $15 million, the bank makes sure the building is worth more than that building. If the bank has a codicil that requires my net worth to be $100 million and submit annual Finacial statements attesting to that fact. When I buy the building I have $100 million invested in the market, $5 million equity in the building I just bought and a golf course in Scotland with land worth $15 million. If I lose $50 million in the market but declare that I built 50 houses on the golf course in Scotland even though I built none would my financial statement be accurate if I say I have $50 million in the market, $5 million in the building the bank has a mortgage on and $50 million worth of houses in Scotland. Do I commit fraud when I sign my financial statement that I send to the bank claiming it is true? Is it the responsibility of the bank to go to Scotland and see if the 50 homes really exist? Is there no fraud if the bank doesn't check to see if I built 50 homes? Does the fraud only occur if I don't make the payment on the loan?

The judge makes clear that the fact that the loans were repaid has no bearing on the fraud.
Timely and total repayment of loans does not extinguish the harm that false statements inflict on
the marketplace. Indeed, the common excuse that “everybody does it” is all the more reason to
strive for honesty and transparency and to be vigilant in enforcing the rules. Here, despite the
false financial statements, it is undisputed that defendants have made all required payments on
time; the next group of lenders to receive bogus statements might not be so lucky. New York
means business in combating business fraud.
Click to expand...
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
You are completely ignorant of what the circumstances are.

If I take out a loan on a building for $15 million, the bank makes sure the building is worth more than that building. If the bank has a codicil that requires my net worth to be $100 million and submit annual Finacial statements attesting to that fact. When I buy the building I have $100 million invested in the market, $5 million equity in the building I just bought and a golf course in Scotland with land worth $15 million. If I lose $50 million in the market but declare that I built 50 houses on the golf course in Scotland even though I built none would my financial statement be accurate if I say I have $50 million in the market, $5 million in the building the bank has a mortgage on and $50 million worth of houses in Scotland. Do I commit fraud when I sign my financial statement that I send to the bank claiming it is true? Is it the responsibility of the bank to go to Scotland and see if the 50 homes really exist? Is there no fraud if the bank doesn't check to see if I built 50 homes? Does the fraud only occur if I don't make the payment on the loan?

The judge makes clear that the fact that the loans were repaid has no bearing on the fraud.
Click to expand...

Timely and total repayment of loans does not extinguish the harm that false statements inflict on
the marketplace. Indeed, the common excuse that “everybody does it” is all the more reason to
strive for honesty and transparency and to be vigilant in enforcing the rules. Here, despite the
false financial statements, it is undisputed that defendants have made all required payments on
time; the next group of lenders to receive bogus statements might not be so lucky. New York
means business in combating business fraud.

So, by your and the judge's own admission, what you are charging Trump with is a Thought crime. In essence, it's Well, next time Trump does this (if there is even a next time) there might be fraud even if this time there really wasn't and everything worked out. Better we punish him for his future, maybe, potential, crimes now than let him go free...

That's what you and the judge are saying. Definitely an 8th Amendment issue there.
 
T. A. Gardner said:

Timely and total repayment of loans does not extinguish the harm that false statements inflict on
the marketplace. Indeed, the common excuse that “everybody does it” is all the more reason to
strive for honesty and transparency and to be vigilant in enforcing the rules. Here, despite the
false financial statements, it is undisputed that defendants have made all required payments on
time; the next group of lenders to receive bogus statements might not be so lucky. New York
means business in combating business fraud.

So, by your and the judge's own admission, what you are charging Trump with is a Thought crime. In essence, it's Well, next time Trump does this (if there is even a next time) there might be fraud even if this time there really wasn't and everything worked out. Better we punish him for his future, maybe, potential, crimes now than let him go free...

That's what you and the judge are saying. Definitely an 8th Amendment issue there.
Click to expand...

You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. The fact that Trump made the payments doesn't disprove that he filed false financial statements. The state has a vested interest in requiring that all those that do business not file false documents since the next time someone files false documents they might not pay off the loan.

Your argument is that everyone can file false documents and only those people that fail to pay their loans can be charged with a crime. That is recipe for disaster. No bank would loan money under those circumstances which causes the damage you claim didn't occur. Banks make loans with the expectation that the person getting the loan is not committing fraud or filing false documents with them. If they knew everyone could lie, interest rates would skyrocket due to the increased risk.
 
Nordberg said:
The victims in many of Trump's financial crimes are the people. Trump cheated the people out of his fair taxes.
Click to expand...
A loan is not taxes, Sock.
Nordberg said:
The burden for supporting government services falls to the people who pay taxes and fair property taxes.
Click to expand...
Taxes are determined by assessors, Sock, not a court. No court has any jurisdiction over the tax assessment carried out in another State.
Nordberg said:
There is always a victim in Trump's crimes.
Click to expand...
No victim. No crime.
Nordberg said:
Like Trump University he escaped with so little cost.
Click to expand...
No victim. No crime.
Nordberg said:
Or his charity which he used for his piggy bank.
Click to expand...
No victim. No crime.
Nordberg said:
Trump left a trail of victims in his wake.
Click to expand...
No victim. No crime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top