NY Fraud cost will cost Trump over $350 miillion

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-21-2024, 01:26 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The amusing/sad thing is that I agree with you about 90-95%.  You just lose me entirely when you can't see more subtle arguments or points that aren't accompanied by hair pulling, mouth frothing, teeth gnashing, histrionics.  Like I said earlier, you guys need 100% agreement or the other person is an enemy.  Sad really.

Not really.

I just don’t want a reality tv show host, friend of Epstein, traitor conman as potus. It’s pretty simple. I’d love to get back to complaining about republicans trying to cut social security, Medicare/medicaid, while rail roading the poor and giving tax breaks to the wealthiest. Until then I’ll keep going ape shit over “republicans” trying to elect a guy who shut the entire planet down due to Americas failed leadership during a pandemic, and who was very close to ending democracy in America and illegally stealing the highest office in the land.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-21-2024, 01:34 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Not really.

I just don’t want a reality tv show host, friend of Epstein, traitor conman as potus. It’s pretty simple. I’d love to get back to complaining about republicans trying to cut social security, Medicare/medicaid, while rail roading the poor and giving tax breaks to the wealthiest. Until then I’ll keep going ape shit over “republicans” trying to elect a guy who shut the entire planet down due to Americas failed leadership during a pandemic, and who was very close to ending democracy in America and illegally stealing the highest office in the land.

As I've mentioned in the past, you're capable of absorbing a logical argument outside your comfort zone (I can recall on 2A discussion we had for example).  But man, when it comes to Trump you are 100% off the deep end.  I understand your stated reasons, even if I don't 100% agree with all of them.  But can you not comprehend why tens of millions of people want him elected?

[NATI BENGALS]

(02-21-2024, 01:59 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: As I've mentioned in the past, you're capable of absorbing a logical argument outside your comfort zone (I can recall on 2A discussion we had for example).  But man, when it comes to Trump you are 100% off the deep end.  I understand your stated reasons, even if I don't 100% agree with all of them.  But can you not comprehend why tens of millions of people want him elected?

No. It's incomprehensible to me. To want to hand the keys of our great nation over to a morally inept, fake religious, power hungry, wanna be dictator. It's horrifyingly deranged and unpatriotic. And makes zero sense. If the goal was actual policy changes there were plenty of other options who were not friends with Epstein for two decades or didn't try to overthrow our democracy with a load of bullshit and a mob of idiots at the capitol or a scheme of fake electors in multiple states.

I'm really not sure how that last part just gets brushed aside. Like it didn't even happen.

[Arturo Bandini]

(02-21-2024, 04:38 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: No. It's incomprehensible to me. To want to hand the keys of our great nation over to a morally inept, fake religious, power hungry, wanna be dictator. It's horrifyingly deranged and unpatriotic. And makes zero sense. If the goal was actual policy changes there were plenty of other options who were not friends with Epstein for two decades or didn't try to overthrow our democracy with a load of bullshit and a mob of idiots at the capitol or a scheme of fake electors in multiple states.

I'm really not sure how that last part just gets brushed aside. Like it didn't even happen.

We have reached a point where truth is just an opinion like another one.

People don't really want to seek truth, they just want to be proved right. 

That's the point of 'doing our own research', it's just scrolling through the web until finding someone you agree with.

[*pally*]

(02-21-2024, 04:38 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: No. It's incomprehensible to me. To want to hand the keys of our great nation over to a morally inept, fake religious, power hungry, wanna be dictator. It's horrifyingly deranged and unpatriotic. And makes zero sense. If the goal was actual policy changes there were plenty of other options who were not friends with Epstein for two decades or didn't try to overthrow our democracy with a load of bullshit and a mob of idiots at the capitol or a scheme of fake electors in multiple states.

I'm really not sure how that last part just gets brushed aside. Like it didn't even happen.

Precisely, I could understand ae vote for him in 2016. In 2020, I didn’t. Potentially in 2024, it is beyond understanding.

I’ve asked and asked people to help me understand and frankly their devotion to Trump defies all logic.

[XenoMorph]

(02-21-2024, 09:31 AM)pally Wrote: Precisely, I could understand ae vote for him in 2016.  In 2020, I didn’t.  Potentially in 2024, it is beyond understanding.

I’ve asked and asked people to help me understand and frankly their devotion to Trump defies all logic.

A guy that was doing good for the country vs a guy thats selling it out at every turn... Damn some of you are weird.

[Arturo Bandini]

(02-21-2024, 09:43 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: A guy that was doing good for the country vs a guy thats selling it out at every turn... Damn some of you are weird.

Like what good ? 

[GMDino]

(02-21-2024, 04:38 AM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: No. It's incomprehensible to me. To want to hand the keys of our great nation over to a morally inept, fake religious, power hungry, wanna be dictator. It's horrifyingly deranged and unpatriotic. And makes zero sense. If the goal was actual policy changes there were plenty of other options who were not friends with Epstein for two decades or didn't try to overthrow our democracy with a load of bullshit and a mob of idiots at the capitol or a scheme of fake electors in multiple states.

I'm really not sure how that last part just gets brushed aside. Like it didn't even happen.

Too many people tell you they don't want P01135809 to win.  Then go back to finding any reason for him to not be charged with anything and tell us that Biden is s senile old man who is destroying the country.

We see the ratio of "He is awful but..." vs "I'd never vote for him" is 100-1 but it doesn't matter.

It's a losing argument on your side because they truly believe P01135809 is being persecuted either by the deep state or the DOJ or "the left" vs his career of being fraudulent coming back to finally get him.  But they can always say they are not defending HIM, just looking for justice.  

One of my best friends voted for P01135809 because he truly believed Hillary Clinton was dirty and awful.  Now he agrees that P01135809 was lost and should never be POTUS again...but...Biden is too old, he's senile, he's not really running things anyway.  He swears he will never vote for P01135809 but he won't vote for any Democrat so I'm not sure what that means.

[Luvnit2]

It is a fact, Trump has been unfairly persecuted by our DOJ. I like consistency. HRC destroyed evidence, FBI reported she broke the law, then refused to prosecute her. Bill Clinton stole classified information (sock incident), but not charged. Biden while a senator with no Presidential authority to remove classified documents steal them and then keeps them for decades in open boxes in his garage (there are pics), DOJ says he is guilty, but no charges because they say he is not competent to stand trial.

NY judge determines Trump should be fined 355 million plus interest for a victimless crime. It is a clear violation of the 8th amendment, but since it is Trump liberals applaud the attempt to ruin Trump financially and put him in jail. They are taking a page out of an evil Putin's playbook and it is obvious unless a person's Trump hatred is blinded.

As far as Jan.6, it was a riot, a riot that lasted hours versus the days of weeks of rioting in 2020 during Covid when everyone was supposed to be locked down. Which was worse? Trump was never charged with insurrection. Why? Because they had no case so time to quit the misinformation campaign, people see the truth.

So, I said consistency of law applied, I would love to hear why HRC was not charged, when DOJ said she was guilty. Why Biden was not charged, but DOJ said he was guilty and broke the law. The BS excuse of cooperation is just the BS, the man had classified documents not secured (Biden lied and said they were under lock and key in file cabinets, but not true) since the 70"s. Were they used for influence peddling by giving away secrets to Russia, China, Ukraine and other countries by Hunter? We don't know, but we do know Hunter Biden had access and was paid 10's of million of dollars by our enemies.

[SunsetBengal]

(02-21-2024, 10:02 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Like what good ? 

My purchasing power was much greater under Trump's leadership.  

[Belsnickel]

(02-21-2024, 03:39 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: My purchasing power was much greater under Trump's leadership.  

Something that POTUS really has no control over.

[Belsnickel]

So, listening to another analysis on this I did get the confirmation of my understanding. The ~$355 million amount is entirely disgorgement and not fines. It is also not at all related to the misstatements about Mar-a-lago as it is related to gains from three properties specifically. This being the case, it undercuts a lot of the arguments against the decision. It will be interesting if there is any grounds for appeal with this.

[*Nately120*]

(02-22-2024, 06:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, listening to another analysis on this I did get the confirmation of my understanding. The ~$355 million amount is entirely disgorgement and not fines. It is also not at all related to the misstatements about Mar-a-lago as it is related to gains from three properties specifically. This being the case, it undercuts a lot of the arguments against the decision. It will be interesting if there is any grounds for appeal with this.

That's what I figured.  Trump himself has said that Mar A Lago is worth $1 billion, which makes it the 3rd most expensive private residence on the planet.  Trump has also stated that his net worth is around $10 billion, so this judgment of $350 million is a mere 0.035% of his net worth.

I'm no math guy, but this is like fining the average American $50 or something isn't it?



EDIT - google says the median US household net worth is $192,900, so the comparison would be roughly a $68 judgment.  So this insane judgment is the equivalent of a regular American getting a parking ticket?  Maybe I'm missing something here, this seems pretty lenient if so.

[*pally*]

The Judge ruled Trump cannot put off paying the judgment pending appeal. The money gets placed in escrow until all appeals are exhausted

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-22-2024, 06:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, listening to another analysis on this I did get the confirmation of my understanding. The ~$355 million amount is entirely disgorgement and not fines. It is also not at all related to the misstatements about Mar-a-lago as it is related to gains from three properties specifically. This being the case, it undercuts a lot of the arguments against the decision. It will be interesting if there is any grounds for appeal with this.

Full disclosure.  I had to look up what disgorgement is, although the word itself gives a lot of clues.  My ignorance professed, I don't see how that affects my concern about not even being allowed to mount an active defense.  Or the actual lender still having zero issue with the terms of the loan.

[*Nately120*]

(02-22-2024, 07:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Full disclosure.  I had to look up what disgorgement is, although the word itself gives a lot of clues.  My ignorance professed, I don't see how that affects my concern about not even being allowed to mount an active defense.  Or the actual lender still having zero issue with the terms of the loan.

Was this the case where Trump elected to use Alina Habba as his lawyer?  He's gotta be complicit if he hires her.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-22-2024, 08:04 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Was this the case where Trump elected to use Alina Habba as his lawyer?  He's gotta be complicit if he hires her.

I don't know what you're talking about.  She looks qualified to me.

[*Nately120*]

(02-22-2024, 09:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I don't know what you're talking about.  She looks qualified to me.

Are you insinuating that Trump thought the trial had a swimsuit competition aspect to it in which she could make up points lost due to her obvious lack of legal acumen?

[GMDino]

https://www.meidastouch.com/news/trump-tries-to-change-ny-business-addresses-to-fl-in-fraud-judgment

Quote:Trump Tries to Change NY Business Addresses to FL in Fraud Judgment
Nice try.

• Ron Filipkowski
• 23 minutes ago
  

Donald Trump's attorneys were required to submit a proposed order for Judge Engoron to sign that conformed to his verdict and judgment in the case. They complied, but in the process it seems that Trump is trying to pull a fast one somewhere along the way.


The proposed judgment that was submitted had the addresses changed for 6 of Trump's businesses from New York to Florida. It is unclear whether this was something done by Trump before his trial in a feeble attempt to put them out of the jurisdiction of the NY courts, or if it was done after the trial to try to avoid the judgment. As with all things Trump, nothing is on the straight and narrow.


Either way, the Attorney General's Office filed an immediately objection to the proposed judgment over these address changes. In their filing, the AG said "several of the addresses for the Defendants in the proposed judgment are incorrect ... the Court should reject Defendants' attempt to change the business address of six entity Defendants to Florida as the record establishes those entities are located in Trump Tower at 725 5th Avenue in New York, the office building in which the executives who carry out business activities of those entities work."
[img=1024x538]https://www.meidastouch.com/.image/t_share/MjA0NTM3OTI0MDE0OTc0OTA1/ny-judgment-1.jpg[/img]


[img=1024x798]https://www.meidastouch.com/.image/t_share/MjA0NTM3OTMwNzI2MTg4MzQ3/ny-judgment-2.jpg[/img]



[url=https://www.meidastouch.com/news/ny-ag-ready-to-seize-trumps-assets-if-he-cant-pay-354m-fraud-fine][/url]

[Belsnickel]

(02-22-2024, 07:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Full disclosure.  I had to look up what disgorgement is, although the word itself gives a lot of clues.  My ignorance professed, I don't see how that affects my concern about not even being allowed to mount an active defense.  Or the actual lender still having zero issue with the terms of the loan.

In what way were they unable to mount an active defense? Also, the judge stated in his ruling the reason why it didn't matter what the lender said; NY law does not require a victim for this particular crime, only an intent to defraud. It should be noted, though, that the fraud occurred with regard to multiple lenders and also governments, another reason it didn't really matter what the lender said.