The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

What is the timeline on paying this government sanctioned embezzlement? Surely he's not expected to just cut a check for that ridiculous amount

While Trump could try a Hail Mary to US Supreme Court at the end, for all intents & purposes his last shot is highest court in New York (new York calls trial court Supreme Court)

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

if you can not see the plain as day corruption before your eyes then you are just not paying attention or have a desired conclusion in mind

This right here is why our country is fooked. These folks vote. I now have brain pain after reading that. Useful idiots for the Party.

After all these years of doing business, and now all of a sudden all these cases get filed at the same time. That doesn't sound like corruption at all does it. Not at all. And the dems used to scream about election interference. Lol

damiond said:

---

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

if you can not see the plain as day corruption before your eyes then you are just not paying attention or have a desired conclusion in mind

---

OK I'll ask again. So, where and what is the corruption that appears before your eyes but not mine, exactly, precisely? Here is your chance to clear this up.

So, since there are no victims of this alleged crime, who gets the money?

damiond said:

---

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

if you can not see the plain as day corruption before your eyes then you are just not paying attention or have a desired conclusion in mind

---

Why do so many people not grasp the distinction between "partisan bias" and "corruption?"

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

You have got to be kidding me. Let's say that Obama was running for President. And let's say the south didn't care for him. And let's say that twenty years before he decided to run, he accidentally missed a payment on his credit card. And let's say the State of Texas found out about it, then made a law that says any late payments on a credit card is now a felony and then passed another law that says, we also are extending the limitations period to…miraculously 20 years prior. Then let's say that the ONLY person sued under this new law was Obama. Then let's say we get a district court in Vidor, Texas to run a sham trial and assess his penalty at 340 million dollars.

Under that scenario, I sincerely doubt you'd be here bloviating about "well, the law is the law."

MagnumLoad said:

---

So, since there are no victims of this alleged crime, who gets the money?

---

Victim or no (which is utterly irrelevant under this statute), the money goes to the State of New York. Always has.

Hungry Ojos said:

---

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

You have got to be kidding me. Let's say that Obama was running for President. And let's say the south didn't care for him. And let's say that twenty years before he decided to run, he accidentally missed a payment on his credit card. And let's say the State of Texas found out about it, then made a law that says any late payments on a credit card is now a felony and then passed another law that says, we also are extending the limitations period to…miraculously 20 years prior. Then let's say that the ONLY person sued under this new law was Obama. Then let's say we get a district court in Vidor, Texas to run a sham trial and assess his penalty at 340 million dollars.

Under that scenario, I sincerely doubt you'd be here bloviating about "well, the law is the law."

---

Irrelevant. That is not the scenario here. What exactly was the corruption in this case. If it is so obvious, serve it up and educate me.

Imagine that. How convenient.

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

Blowing your load over a state that has demonstrated that anything goes when the government chooses or passes on whether or not an individual will be prosecuted. I am not an expert on Trumps trial in New York City but the useful idiots in the press have been saying Trump is guilty of fraud as it applies to some of his real estate assets. So far the press has been wrong on most claims about Trump. If the banks had no issues, the banks auditors had no issue and the loans were paid back…..not sure I see a problem there.

You must love HRC?

Rockdoc said:

---

After all these years of doing business, and now all of a sudden all these cases get filed at the same time. That doesn't sound like corruption at all does it. Not at all. And the dems used to scream about election interference. Lol

---

"The Equal Protection Clause is part of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides "nor shall any State... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." It mandates that individuals in similar situations be treated equally by the law.

Maybe Trump can claim unequal treatment under the 14th ammendment?

If this decision holds, New York just destroyed future real estate transactions and crippled its own economy. If everyone is now suddenly subject to the same rules as Trump, there should be a long, long list of upcoming lawsuits filed by the state against countless other individuals and corporations.

I pray this comes back to burn that sorry place to the ground.

Since the libs don't like climate deniers, when does NY come after Exxon or any other oil company? Same valuation process goes on in every business. Of course, libs wouldn't know that.

Quote:

---

Nevertheless, Engoron a registered Democrat issued a summary judgment finding Trump liable for fraud before Trump had any opportunity to present any evidence in his own defense. The trial then proceeded to a determination of the penalty owed.

---

Procedurally, that is not allowed. The very definition of when it is appropriate to issue summary judgment is when there are no material facts in dispute. Either malfeasance or gross incompetence by the judge.

Quote:

---

The Associated Press reported in January that there was no precedent for New York law being used or abused in this way:

Quote:

---

An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of similar cases showed Trump's case stands apart: It's the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.

Some legal experts worry if the New York judge goes ahead with such a penalty in a final ruling expected within the next couple of weeks, it could make it easier for courts to wipe out companies in the future.
…
A finding of fraud under the New York's statute, known as Executive Law 63(12), does not require any misrepresentations or flat-out lies result in anyone getting duped or losing money.

But AP's review of nearly 150 cases reported in legal databases found that in the dozen cases calling for "dissolution," victims and losses were key factors.
…
The only case the AP found of a business dissolved under the anti-fraud law without citing actual victims or losses was a relatively small company closed in 1972 for writing term papers for college students. In that case, the attorney general said the victim was the "integrity of the educational process."

---

---

So this statute has never before been interpreted in this fashion, because it was not intended to apply to such transactions.

Quote:

---

Ultimately, Engoron fined Trump $354 million $450 million, with pre-trial interest and barred Trump from doing business in New York for three years. His two sons were each barred from doing business in New York for two years, and fined $4 million.

If, indeed, "everyone must play by the same rules," that standard would seem to apply to James as well. The fact that she singled Trump out, and that she had an obvious agenda in doing so, will factor into Trump's appeal and the court of public opinion.

---

LINK

This case was messed up from the beginning. The judge's hostility towards Trump, his sons and their counsel was obvious.

So you're saying no political bias here at all?

FCBlitz said:

---

I am not an expert on Trumps trial in New York City but the useful idiots in the press have been saying Trump is guilty of fraud as it applies to some of his real estate assets. So far the press has been wrong on most claims about Trump.

---

If you read a report that he was found "guilty" of something, the reporter was wrong. This was not a criminal proceeding, and the defendant cannot be found "guilty." He was found to have violated New York Executive Law Section 63(12), and a civil enforcement penalty was assessed against him.

Quote:

---

If the banks had no issues, the banks auditors had no issue and the loans were paid back…..not sure I see a problem there.

---

That is the law as related to common law fraud. This was not a common law fraud case. It was a statutory enforcement proceeding, and those are NOT the elements of a statutory violation under Section 63(12).

You are comparing apples to hand grenades.

heteroscedasticity said:

---

Hungry Ojos said:

---

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

You have got to be kidding me. Let's say that Obama was running for President. And let's say the south didn't care for him. And let's say that twenty years before he decided to run, he accidentally missed a payment on his credit card. And let's say the State of Texas found out about it, then made a law that says any late payments on a credit card is now a felony and then passed another law that says, we also are extending the limitations period to…miraculously 20 years prior. Then let's say that the ONLY person sued under this new law was Obama. Then let's say we get a district court in Vidor, Texas to run a sham trial and assess his penalty at 340 million dollars.

Under that scenario, I sincerely doubt you'd be here bloviating about "well, the law is the law."

---

Irrelevant. That is not the scenario here. What exactly was the corruption in this case. If it is so obvious, serve it up and educate me.

---

What was the corruption in the Trump case or my example? Because in either scenario, the answer is simply "wow, this guy (you) is so blinded by partisan politics, there is no sense in trying to have an adult conversation with him."

Ag87H2O said:

---

If this decision holds, New York just destroyed future real estate transactions and crippled its own economy. If everyone is now suddenly subject to the same rules as Trump, there should be a long, long list of upcoming lawsuits filed by the state against countless other individuals and corporations.

---

You seem to believe that New York is replete with businesses that make knowing and intentional misrepresentations and their financial statements and that businesses will flee the state if those businesses are not allowed to continue a pattern of intentional falsehood.

I suspect that you are wrong on both counts.

Maybe the AG was right, and maybe she was wrong, but her allegation (under the statute) was that Trump KNEW he was making false representations of the value of these properties. That is a FAR cry from two competing , good-faith appraisals.

Simple math here. What do you get when you multiply anything by zero, you get zero.

No damages here. Zero.

How was the public harmed at all? They were not.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Nevertheless, Engoron a registered Democrat issued a summary judgment finding Trump liable for fraud before Trump had any opportunity to present any evidence in his own defense. The trial then proceeded to a determination of the penalty owed.

---

Procedurally, that is not allowed. The very definition of when it is appropriate to issue summary judgment is when there are no material facts in dispute. Either malfeasance or gross incompetence by the judge.

---

Except for the fact that this is not remotely what happened. Trump presented affidavit testimony in response to the MSJ regarding valuations, and the testimony of his "experts" was deemed inadmissible under New York evidentiary law for a variety of reasons. Because he then HAD no evidence, summary judgment was awarded.

I don't know if our side will ever be in power again, but I truly hope that if we do, we have men of integrity who won't do things like this to our enemies such as yourself. Because unlike you, I would NEVER cheerfully support it.

BMX Bandit said:

---

While Trump could try a Hail Mary to US Supreme Court at the end, for all intents & purposes his last shot is highest court in New York (new York calls trial court Supreme Court)

---

Does Trump have a legitimate chance there in your opinion? BTW, back to the topic. Although, I did open this up with my "corruption" point.

aggiehawg said:

---

Simple math here. What do you get when you multiply anything by zero, you get zero.

No damages here. Zero.

How was the public harmed at all? They were not.

---

How is the public harmed when you jaywalk with no oncoming traffic? How is the public harmed when you park in a handicapped space but no handicapped person is deprived of a place to park? How is the public harmed when you drive 130mph on a completely empty road?

The statute books are FULL of prohibitions against behavior that did not technically cause any direct and tangible harm to any individual or to "the public."

If that's true, that's even worse of an action by the judge.

" that Trump violated these laws " OK State Of NY, now do a forensic audit of every real estate developer in the State. The obvious corruption is selective prosecution,especially since there is no complaint and no victim !

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

The corruption is the inconsistent application of the law.

Politician R has top secret documents in a safe at his home. His house gets raided by federal officers in tactical gear and his staff gets threatened with long jail sentences for "moving boxes" unless they "cooperate". Department of justice has continued to investigate in hopes of convicting on federal charges but has opted to drag their feet on trial until election year.

Politician D had top secret documents loose in his garage and on his corvette. His home gets visited at a predetermined time by federal officers in suits. His staff was found to have been shredding documents but they didn't know what they were shredding. Additionally, federal attorneys deem candidate incompetent to stand trial so no prosecution recommended. Case wrapped up well before Election Day and in currently half the time as previously mentioned case.

This exact same story is playing out everywhere a "D" DA has an opportunity against candidate "R". If you are a home or property owner in Texas, I GUARANTEE you inflated the price of your property when you tried to sell it and you diminished its value every time you got your annual tax statement. In doing so, you would have committed fraud under the strict application of the listed statutes. Lucky for you, you have never run for office against the established political party in your area. If you choose to challenge that power, you now know what is coming for you. Better think again.

The value of a property is whatever someone is willing to pay for it and/or accept. Period. Trump, the banks, and the insurance companies all agreed on the value of his properties. For the government to decide years after the fact to apply this statute on a matter that had been amicably settled by all involved parties is corruption. It's even more obvious corruption when the AG runs not on the equal distribution of justice but a finding a way to destroy political opposition. If you can't see that, you are democrat zealot at best or a moron at worst.

heteroscedasticity said:

---

damiond said:

---

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

if you can not see the plain as day corruption before your eyes then you are just not paying attention or have a desired conclusion in mind

---

OK I'll ask again. So, where and what is the corruption that appears before your eyes but not mine, exactly, precisely? Here is your chance to clear this up.

---

No the laws are not for this "exact" thing. They used a law on the books in a way never before used. And it was done by someone that ran politically for the sole purpose of "getting trump". It is the literal "show me the man and I'll find the crime". She ran on that. Dug and dug. Found no victims anywhere. Then twisted a law on the books. That seems "corrupt" to many people.

Trump did not "unequivocally" violate the law. First, no law addresses this exactly. So it's impossible by definition to "unequivocally" violate a nonexistent law. Also, the judge showed bias through the entire proceedings. He literally said in the same writing "only Trump knows the value of his properties" yet "I'm going to use the value these other people use." He ignored all experts consistent with Trump. Said there are "no fact issues" on an issue which by definition is a literal fact issue - the "value" of something. Only one thing could possibly diverge there and that's the sq ft of an apartment issue. Even on that there are issues that make a fact issue. some see a purely partisan hack judge being contradictory himself and ignoring all facts in favor of Trump on a summary judgment when you are suppose to do the exact opposite as corrupt.

The "guidelines" used by the judge are basically: "I'm going To believe the guy that gave me the numbers I wanted and ignore EVERYONE ELSE including the banks that said no damages. Again, some view a completely partisan hack out to literally destroy a man as corrupt.

It is gross what the left is doing to this country. You'd have to be as dumb as a Georgia lawyer to think what happened in New York is not corrupt. (Talking about fani Willis and wade of course ;-) )

damiond said:

---

heteroscedasticity said:

---

MagnumLoad said:

---

The NY appeals court is as or more corrupt than the one he was found guilty in. The verdict was obviously predetermined. So, is the NY appellate the last possible option?

---

Corrupt? In what way, exactly, precisely? These kinds of statements are getting ridiculous. This is dead simple folks.

1. There are laws in NY against the exact types of business improprieties that Trump was accused of.

2. That trump violated these laws is unequivocal. There is no wiggle room at all, it's all spelled out clear as day in the financial documents. You can't inflate or underestimate the value of your assets as you wish to gain advantage. The wrongdoing was so obvious, pervasive, and clearly intentional that there was no need for a civil jury trial. Fraud occurred, period.

3. The only thing left was for the judge to evaluate the nature and extent of punishment/damages. There are guidelines for this, and the punishment dished out by the judge is consistent with those guidelines.

So, where is the corruption, exactly, precisely?

---

if you can not see the plain as day corruption before your eyes then you are just not paying attention or have a desired conclusion in mind

---

my favorite part about your account is that you post zingers like this making fun of people who think this way, and they're never in on the joke

Antoninus said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Simple math here. What do you get when you multiply anything by zero, you get zero.

No damages here. Zero.

How was the public harmed at all? They were not.

---

How is the public harmed when you jaywalk with no oncoming traffic? How is the public harmed when you park in a handicapped space but no handicapped person is deprived of a place to park? How is the public harmed when you drive 130mph on a completely empty road?

The statute books are FULL of prohibitions against behavior that did not technically cause any direct and tangible harm to any individual or to "the public."

---

That's lame. Where is the public safety issue here since you wish to conflate the two.

The amount of the judgement is supposed to have some basis other than orange man bad.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Trump presented affidavit testimony in response to the MSJ regarding valuations, and the testimony of his "experts" was deemed inadmissible under New York evidentiary law for a variety of reasons. Because he then HAD no evidence, summary judgment was awarded.

---

If that's true, that's even a worse action by the judge.

---

Why?

If someone files an MSJ against me, and I present affidavits in response from a witness who (for example) lacks personal knowledge, is the judge a "bad guy" for refusing to consider that (inadmissible) affidavit testimony?

Of should the Rules of Evidence just not apply to one Donald J. Trump?