Judge Engoron's 'Violation' Opens Door for Trump Appeal: Attorney
By: Kate Plummer (Newsweek)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
By Kate Plummer FOLLOW
Judge Arthur Engoron has created an opportunity for Donald Trump to appeal his civil fraud judgment by a "due process violation," an attorney has said.
Speaking on Fox News on Tuesday, former Whitewater lawyer Sol Wisenberg said there were constitutional problems with the ruling that the former president and top executives at The Trump Organization committed fraud by inflating the value of his assets to obtain more favorable terms from lenders and insurers.
On Friday, Engoron ordered Trump to pay $355 million in fines. New York State mandates a 9 percent interest rate on the sum of damages and New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the lawsuit, said that with pre-judgment interest the penalty totals over $450 million—an amount "which will continue to increase every single day" until the judgment is paid.
Donald Trump speaks during a Fox News town hall on February 20, 2024 in Greenville, South Carolina. Speaking on Fox News, Sol Wisenberg criticized the civil fraud ruling against Trump.Donald Trump speaks during a Fox News town hall on February 20, 2024 in Greenville, South Carolina. Speaking on Fox News, Sol Wisenberg criticized the civil fraud ruling against Trump.Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Speaking about the judgment, which Trump has vowed to appeal, Wisenberg said: "It seems to me there's some real constitutional problems with the $355 million judgment when there is no victim, no financial loss of any kind."
"You have an argument for a substantive due process violation," he continued, and said the decision might send a message to certain businesses that if you upset the orthodoxy they could face similar action.
He added: "I think that they do have again, a potential constitutional argument here, a very strong one here if they appropriately raised it at trial."
"It's outrageous there's no way you can defend this judgment," he said.
However, Bradley Moss, a partner at Mark S. Zaid, disagreed. He told Newsweek: "Unless the state law itself is struck down, this argument will go nowhere. Many white collar criminal cases do not have a traditional victim. Many criminal drug offenses do not have a traditional victim. Many licensing and registration offenses do not have a traditional victim.
"The victim is the public that was defrauded."
Carlton Fields attorney Gene Rossi also told Newsweek: "The Trump family and organization received loans when they should not have. You cannot lie to get money. Moreover, if the banks had known of the real assets and liabilities, then they would have required more unfavorable terms for Trump World. That is a crime no matter how you look at it. Substantive due process violation because of no victims? I think not."
Trump's lawyer Christopher Kise told Newsweek that the former president plans to appeal the judge's ruling in James' "unjust political crusade against the front-running candidate for President of the United States."
Alina Habba, an attorney for Trump, also announced an appeal will be filed.
"Given the grave stakes, we trust that the Appellate Division will overturn this egregious verdict and end this relentless persecution against my clients," Habba said in a statement.
"Let me make one thing perfectly clear: this is not just about Donald Trump—if this decision stands, it will serve as a signal to every single American that New York is no longer open for business," she added.
James called the judge's ruling "a massive victory" in a post on X, formerly Twitter, on Friday. She added in a statement: "No matter how big, how rich, or how powerful you are, no one is above the law. Not even Donald Trump."
Calling members trolls or dishonest will cause your comments to be deleted. NT rules apply
Tags
Who is online
51 visitors
Oh oh. This is going to open a whole new can of worms. Can you say SCotUS?
Why would one attorney's opinion make any difference here?
It opens other attorney's, and perhaps judges, eyes.
It won't.
It won't make a bit of difference, I meant to say.
FRAUD IS FRAUD
So because the lenders didn't do their part, this is Trump's (and his organizations) fault? How stupid do you have to be (NOT IT'S NOT A CHALLENGE) to even think that makes sense?
Yes, hence the FRAUD charges..... Trump knowingly falsified documents and values then knowingly signed those documents attesting to their truth despite knowing that they were not true.
And the dumbfucks didn't do their due diligence and have appraisal and assessments done.
Makes no difference. FRAUD IS FRAUD. The falsified documents = FRAUD. PERIOD. END OF SENTENCE.
Not their problem. They have a signed, probably notarized, document swearing to the truth of the document under penalty of law.
You must not understand how banks work.
No bank is going to take the word of any applicant over their own research, which would take them maybe all of 5 minutes. Banks also have a fiduciary duty to protect its shareholders and would never give out money like that without doing any research at all, the very idea is preposterous.
Moreover, MAGAs are attempting to drop a 'rabbit-hole' here. The matter is a matter of law; not supposing or passion. I have shared on this article at 5.1.2. and 6.1.3 what New York law is regarding this matter. MAGAs want to argue emotion. Odd, when others express emotion about any matter of law, MAGAs draw their attention back to the law. They should not be allowed to argue away from the rule of law in this case, since the facts have been established to have occurred/proven to the satisfaction of the judge.
And we can't forget about that the lenders testified that THEY approved the loans, and the loans were paid in full with interest. So, it begs to question....exactly where is the fraud?
New York is indeed open for business. Just follow the law, unlike the former 'president'.
Yeah hold onto that thought.............gonna be wide open if much more of this shit happens.
Good riddance to anyone who leaves NY because of the fraud, the former 'president'.
Who cares?
Much more of 'what shit'?
Or who decided because of this decision (Yeah, right
) to now NOT do business in NY?
I don't think so!
People who rely on them for jobs and taxes paid to NYC probably.
Guess you didn't read this the first time.
Which wasn't Trump since he committed fraud with the IRS to minimize his taxes.
And he was audited every year and no charges or fines were ever levied.
When and for how much?
Those who live in New York when the tax base decreases. Real estate investors bring a lot of money into an area and provide for a higher tax base. As more of them decide to do business elsewhere, it will have a negative effect on the tax base that New York is able to draw in.
Funny how the IRS hasn't brought any charges for this. Maybe you should take your knowledge and present it to them.
Read it again.
They won't really leave NY. And if they do, no one really gives a fuck. It won't make any difference.
We shall see. It won't happen overnight, but gradually. Kind of like how California is looking at a huge deficit hole in their budget.
No, we won't. It won't make any difference.
That's exactly what I said, which part of that can't you comprehend?
That's what they claimed. Why should I believe him/them?
It won't make one bit of difference either way.
NYC has recently experienced about a $9 billion deficit due at least in part to higher-earning citizens moving out of the city and/or state.
Sometimes it is hard to understand how taxes work!
You're confused, that never happened. It's not illegal to take steps to minimize your taxes.
Safe to assume you just made that up out of thin air and have zero supporting documents.
It is if it's illegal, Greg.
Sometimes, proof of what is claimed sure would be a breath of fresh air.
Got any?
And if what Trump had done was illegal, the IRS would have brought charges. Since they haven't, it seems like you are spreading false news.
So fraud isn't a crime anymore? Wow, talk about spreading false news. He LOST. Fucking get over it.
Put it another way, if Hillary did the exact same thing, would you be defending her? Never in a million fuckin' years.
If Hillary had done the same thing, then I suspect you would be falling over yourself talking about how rigged the system was and something about Hillary witch hunts.
You're the one who insinuated that what Trump had done to reduce his tax liability was illegal. I countered with had he done so I'm confident the IRS would have caught it and already brought him to court. So why don't you provide some proof to your allegation or just admit you are spreading false news.
And in case you missed it, post 4.1.22 said absolutely nothing about him losing in 2020. So in addition, you deflect.
The case was in NY... Did you miss that part?
I would say the same fucking thing. Doing what you can WITHIN THE BOUNDRIES OF THE LAW to reduce one's tax liability is not illegal. What would you be saying if Hillary was accused of illegally not paying taxes owed?
Nope, didn't miss that part at all. Would love for you to point out where Trump was found guilty of fraud against the IRS to lower his tax bill. After all, that's what you have been pointing out. So provide some fucking proof.
It is if you COMMIT FRAUD!
State case, not federal, already pointed out a few times. Quit being obtuse.
Which trump clearly did not do.
Backpedaling already? Our entire conversation was about how you claiming Trump committed fraud to lower his tax liability. Did the State of New York Department of Revenue bring charges here? What fraud did Trump commit to lower his tax bill? There's no mention of tax fraud from Judge Engoron. You are the one pushing it, so you need to prove it.
[deleted]
Neither did any of the banks/financial institutions. Just an overzealous Attorney General.
Too bad banks/financial institutions are not courts of law, because it would matter what they would do in this case. As it is, they do not. I do find it interesting that you have a perspective that lets Donald go "free and clear" and the court system and law be damned.
They do not do what?
Never should have gotten to court.
Donald Trump is not above the law, so he goes to civil court for a decision (just like you or I would) in this case.
But they never really explained how the public was defrauded. How is the public the victim?
Because Truuuuuuuuuuuuuuuump!!!
There. Research has been acquired and laid-out for consideration. No more excuses or plays at ignorance of N. Y. State law!
I've never denied the law. But what you posted doesn't explain the comment I replied to which states "The victim is the public that was defrauded." I do wish someone would explain just how the public was defrauded. Because the DA never really explained that. She just hopped on the bandwagon that the law states she can determine if fraud has occurred.
Consider this law has never been used in New York where there were not damages of some sort, ie someone lost money or was harmed. It's never been used to put a business out of business except where there were injuries and loss. Consider this is a DA who campaigned on how she was going to "get Trump". How is this a fair judgement?
I suspect that this will get overturned on appeal but am willing to wait and see. I wonder how many on this board are also willing to wait.
Um, because the public pays taxes?
Ok, so show some evidence that the public paid more in taxes because of what Trump was found guilty of. You keep pushing that line, so showing the evidence should be easy, right? After all, one would hate to be pushing false news.
It doesn't matter, it's ILLEGAL!!!! WTF? Are you serious?
Campaigning on "getting Trump" is not a legal motion or charge. This is a civil trial and when the matter came before the judge—you surely know that a judge rules/runs/manages his/her court and the legal proceedings which occur there so don't pretend like you don't SEE the judge's taking control from a jury and making a summary judgement as something on no value and you can ignore.
It is not my responsibility to argue with you about the facts. Facts that are being laid out a la carte in this discussion. And, you are being too stubborn to allow or internalize.
If you want to dispute the judge do so, but you will get nowhere with a court (or me) trying to focus on rhetoric. A. G. James can't use the court as her 'instrument' to play if there are not instruments to be played on. Those were provided by Donald and his sons. Protest them: Not A.G. James who by the way did her job!
Finally, you often 'speak' about neutrality here. It's time you demonstrated it in this situation. And above all get the context of this case, its personalities, plantiffs, and decision-makers correct!
Because 'they' are the Plantiff in this case.
If it’s illegal, he surely must have been charged with a crime. Funny New York forgot to do that
Because the public is the plantiff. The state allows for it to be so—legally. AKA: "The People."
Exactly.
You mean other than fraud?
Prove to me he is innocent?
No.
This:
I love the block function.. LOL
Seems to be the perfect way to avoid difficult questions.
So Ms. James took a vote or show of hands from the citizens and it was a yes? Fuck no she didn't. She campaigned on getting Trump and how she is getting away with this (we shall see after appeal) is bullshit.
Partisan nonsense! There is a judge involved here and yet MAGAs train all their 'attack' on the A.G., as it seems selective shooting of the messenger is more important than law to MAGAs.
Nothing like an admission you can't show some evidence that the public paid more in taxes because of what Trump was found guilty of.
The judge is just as much a problem as the AG. Not like you would stop with the partisan nonsense to acknowledge any of it.
I can see how Trump got himself into the mess he is in—from my location on the West Coast. You can't see it from your approximate position 'anywhere.' That is a problem for you and not for the courts! The court has decided, and possibly another court (or appeals) will decide farther and the SCOTUS after that will likely have to wrap this up and tie a bow on it. The courts will decide Trump's business fate in New York. And the rest of us will have no choice-either way-but to accept the final outcome. As with all things Trump we have no choice but to wait it out and, watch this space.
Donald Trump is a flaming idiot. He is a menace to society and community. You can have him and place him in your special menagerie and give the rest of us a break from the idiocy that is he.
Who brought the charges?
Well, gee, that sounds swell and all, but the sad truth is some liberals need Trump or they would have nothing to talk about.
And some Dems need Trump because that is their and Biden's whole campaign:
"I am not as bad as that other guy"
Make a statement, please.
We all see it. He embarrassed the Democrats at their own game. They've been gunning for him since.
I notice you leave out that it is a CIVIL court, not criminal. I guess the burden of proof for the criminal court was difficult to meet.
You actually think that by not being able to conduct business in NY will be a problem?
He hurt your feelings. I get it. And actually, you haven't proven the second sentence there.
Thanks but he's living rent free in YOUR head. It's evident every time you blather on about "Maga this" and Maga that".
Oh, and I did notice you couldn't put the partisan nonsense aside to respond objectively.
You have no idea how our monetary system works do you?
The state of NY.
Still waiting for some evidence that the public paid more in taxes because of what Trump was found guilty of.
No one Letitia James. She campaigned on getting Trump.
So the banks losing millions upon millions of dollars because of Trump's fraud do not make them "victims"?
They didn't seem to think so............and you can't lose what you didn't have in the first place.
Who did you ask? Specifically.
They testified basically on his behalf. Didn't follow the trial did ya?
Who is 'they' and I thought that this was just this one attorney's opinion, which could open other attorney's, or judge's, eyes
Like they don't know the law in the first place
MAGAs are complaining about the court system (again). Apparently, they point to the invalid clause in these contracts and non-existent clause in the law that states: 'When there is no victim/s the law is rendered irrelevant.' Albeit, they can not point to either clause anywhere, unless it is in their minds.
One other interesting point (about the legal system): In this political climate we are in, the courts do well to realize that certain forces are massed together to coerce "parties" to conform and consent to abuse if they wish future MAGAs business contracts or be freedom of verbal and physical assaults.
Banks. Follow the story if you are going to comment.
So 3rd or 4th hand accounts?
Name a bank that was defrauded and lost money.
MAGAs are trying to deflect to other 'goalposts.' I remind us all that the courts have decided and this question has been settled as to why A.G. James can bring the case to court for the people: Read 5.1.2 above.
Psst. You know the deal: MAGAs want to talk about 'feelings' now, since the courts are stamping down on their 'dicks.' The 'facts only' MAGAs desperately want feelings to be the order of the day, when they can't coax a court or law to do their bidding. Such inconsistency.
Say, remember the good old days when some liberals and Democrats were hell-bent on selling us on the fact (or so they claimed) that no bank in NY would do business with Trump?
LMMFAO!
[deleted]
[other members are not the topic]
So if I slam into your car, and no one gets hurt, there is no crime. Awesome!
Yes, and you can do it over and over again, year after year, and no problem!
It's like 1/6, since it didn't get away with it, no problem, no big whoop.
So,you're backpedaling now. Got it.
I love your brilliant legal mind.
Trump's misrepresentations cost banks $168M, expert testifies
The state's expert witness, Michiel McCarty, calculated that Donald Trump's lenders lost $168 million in potential interest between 2014 and 2023, according to a report he presented in court.
McCarty's testimony appeared to reinforce a central tenet of New York Attorney General Letitia James' case: that Trump's misrepresentations in his financial statements cost banks potential earnings from interest, even if the banks made money on the loans.
State attorney Kevin Wallace directed McCarty to a footnote in Judge Engoron's earlier summary judgment order about the concept of lost interest, in which Engoron said, "The subject loans made the banks lots of money; but the fraudulent SFCs [Statements of Financial Condition] cost the banks lots of money. The less collateral for a loan, the riskier it is, and a first principle of loan accounting is that as risk rises, so do interest rates. Thus, accurate SFCs would have allowed the lenders to make even more money than they did."
McCarty, who said he agreed with this assessment, ultimately found that banks lost a total of $168,040,168 in potential interest from loans related to four of Trump's properties in Miami, New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.
Trump civil fraud case: Judge fines Trump $354 million, says frauds 'shock the conscience' - ABC News (go.com)
Trump has long argued that sophisticated parties negotiated the transactions, and everybody made money. The attorney general countered that the banks approved loans on favorable terms, based on fraudulent statements of financial conditions (SFCs).
In his dissolution order, Engoron summarized that argument in a footnote.
when banks negotiated interest terms with trump they did so under the impression they were getting accurate financial information from the trump organization , but they werent, which means they were fraudulently put at a disadvantage in the negotiation. The State of New York says it is fraud punishable by fines and other 'retribution'
your argument is a loser
That is another thing too: A.G. James when she finds the time in her otherwise busy schedule probably could make a career out of charging New York businesses with incorrect property valuations and reporting to banks, as well as charging banks for their seeming 'unawareness' of discrepancies. Because it is clear to me that if petitioners for loans and the banks are cutting deals with each other—there are other businesses left out of the financing loop that could use a loan, but are not getting it due to preferential treatment of some.
When did 'greedy' banks start saying it is okay (permissible) to stiff them on interest? And, that this is acceptable to do so on a city or state-wide basis for indefinite periods? (Rhetorical.)
Have you EVER taken out a mortgage loan?
Or a car loan?
Did the bank say "Okay, how much do you say the car is worth, or the house is worth, and we'll finance it for you no problem, no questions asked?
Your comment exhibits a lack of knowledge on how banks actually operate.
The car, property, got hurt and thus I got hurt financially and unable to drive interrupting my freedom of life. Your example resembles swiss cheese.
So cut the fine to what the "theoretical" loss was. $168M and split it up with the financial institutions. NOT the fucking state.
Nope. The judge does not see how the law can PROP up Donald Trump above other New Yorkers!
What does that even mean??
Obviously you have no reply to the fact that an expert witness said the banks were cheated , by TRUMP. Keep getting all that nonsense from right wing media, and you will continue to lose every argument.
There are people here who are impervious to facts.
What a mess.
Obviously you are deflecting away from my comment by talking about a post I didn't bother to respond to.
Right. Billion dollar banks who do this for a living were too stupid to realize they were cheated, but the professional "expert" for hire whose paycheck depends on offering the requested opinion is the one who understands what happened.
Isn't it AMAZING that not one single bank came forward to press any charges in this case--even AFTER the conniving AG brought the suit?
It's amazing that the bloggers the left are relying on aren't reporting that the banks testified that, yes, they approved the loan and the loan was paid back in full with interest.
One would have to have a very low IQ to think that a bank would knowingly set themselves up to be part of this so called "fraud". Even the AG couldn't provide enough proof to meet the standards in a criminal case. That's why they opted for a civil case. Lower standards.
Not anymore.
It is to be expected.
It's laughable to consider those who write for the (m)ass media anything other than bloggers. None of them are objective in their articles. It's all written by their feelings. Yet some (who also have hurt feelings) lap drink it up.
Agree. They also have a hard time differentiating between opinion and facts.
You would think the lending institutions would know that even better than the expert if it were true.
Pretty much...unless you were doing something nefarious like drinking or driving dangerously. Otherwise just another fender bender.
His opinion based on what?
Actually, yours is.
It has been noted many times that each financial statement submitted by Trump had a disclaimer stating that the banks had the responsibility of due diligence with what was submitted.
Apparently they did not.
Not Trump's fault.
Your lame pronouncements have no real value or legal standing in New York State where Trump was already found guilty...
So prove me wrong.....
Without using a meme.
Can you do it?
Apparently, the big MAGAs thing was "elected officials" were THE appropriate go to—until it was not! I remember MAGAs in congress and on various campaigns dissing "unelected judges" and "unelected bureaucrats" and assenting to the power of ELECTED OFFICIALS as the be all. But, now that propaganda talking point lands on a proverbial trash heap of the moment (to be retrieved when needed again) when Donald is getting his comeuppance. MAGAs once again caught being shamelessly phony and inconsistent.
[deleted]
Wow. Again with the support for a cheater who wants to be in charge of the country. Just stunning. "New York means business in combating business fraud."
Anywho, here is Judge Engoron's statement on this:
A reasonable statement from the judge.
You are literally saying that trump lying to the banks is not his fault.
lol
Harm is being done on NYC marketplace as the judge said. Only it is not trump doing the damage.
The law, in this case, does not allow for "invincibility" against a lawsuit based on adding "worthless [disclaimer] clauses" - the responsibility for submission of accurate documents to lenders resides with businesses under signing. A line of reasoning suggesting it should fails.
Bogus statements submitted for loans. . . is against the law. You should not make comments in support of or steering people to act the rule of law (in New York state)! Such advice is against the law and will get those who receive it and act on it in legal jeopardy of a lawsuit!
I would ask you to prove that the banks lost millions and millions but we both know you can't. But i'm willing for you to surprise me, No bullshit anecdotal evidence because it is just that, bullshit, but actual proof. Show me a bank that has said it was a victim of trumps "fraud"
Tell me what banks lost MILIONS and MILLIONS of dollars?
'The people of the state of New York.'
That is utter bullshit.
That's not a bank, try again.
I don't have to. You and others can't set up a false narrative and have any expectations of a court abiding by it. It's. . .delusional. Courts don't do delusion. And me neither.
IF they could name a single bank, they WOULD.
Nope, wrong again. The post you responded to asked a simple question,
You are deflecting away from the question and reposting the same as before as if it answers all questions. Try answering the questions directly.
If you don't want an answer just say so and be done. Cat and Mouse games are not what this site is about, Snuffy. As for the comment about banks, at 6.3.1 "the state treasury" is its bank repository enough to satisfy its need—whether it suffices for you personally in this discussion is not a matter the courts or state of New York cares to deal with as rhetoric.
And how much are you claiming the "bank" lost?
Prove that fraud isn't a crime?
We'll wait.
You QUOTED his question and are merely pretending it says something other than it actually does, I guess that is a new way to deflect.
Fraud is a crime. Why wasn’t trump charged with a crime?
Jackie Gleason in "The Honeymooners":
"Humina,uh, humina, humina"
So hundreds of millions in damages and trump committed no crime at all? Maybe you should apply to be his lawyer and prove his point.
Why change what he actually asked you?
Now you are getting it. He was not charged with a crime. Why would he need a lawyer to defend him from a crime no one claims he committed?
To protect him from all the internet lawyers and DAs?
Fraud....pretty sure that's a crime...
Wow...
Will you at least acknowledge the fact that the case was in CIVIL Court and NO criminal charges were filed??
Fraud is a crime:
fraud noun ˈfrȯd Synonyms of fraud
: DECEIT , TRICKERY
This should be obvious, but If the banks lost millions, they’d be the ones suing trump.
Why didn't you let the Judge know that?
Maybe he figured that someone with an education would know that already.
Or that the bank would sue to recover losses.
See 6.3.1.
That's not responsive to what I wrote.
If you defraud a bank, the bank sues you to recover the money. The bank(s) get no money from this. Can you figure out why?
May I take a WILD guess here?
Because the banks were not defrauded?
The courts could give a damn about providing you a satisfactory response. And I agree with the courts! As it STANDS right now the state of New York treasury will house the funds (be all the bank needed as provided by statue of law) from Donald and serve the people (New York public) from its largesse. It is the law. Like it or lump it. It is what it is.
Name a bank, today, willing to lend trump money?
Name some that won't.
New York should be more concerned about the number of people deciding not to invest there because they are afraid the same bullshit will happen to them.
So you can't name even one, got it.
Name one what? You are flailing.
nothing about the business NYC will lose?
This implies you side with business fraud and fraudsters in general since you ignore or 'combat' the instruction and direction of state aw. A sickening case of "Buyer beware."
Totally irrelevant
Here's one.......................
And another
Dodgy. The dismissal of the implication is indicative of your agreement with an extreme "buyer beware" default position for New York and possibly other states as well. To state it a different way: You appear to have no interest in the rule of law that governs New York state due to this Trump case.
Nope
So CORRUPT business practices that go around or ignore the rule of law is a viable 'game' for MAGAs. I hope 'everybody' reading this gets the message being sent and delivered.
And the message from some liberals is:
We don't like you or your politics, so we will use any law to bring you down and even campaign on bringing you down. Even when there are no victims.
Yous statements of recent contradict you above on its face.
Trump legal lawsuits are due to being over creative and treating the (business) rule of law with disrespect. Other companies, wise to avoid Trump's poor business model, will do well. . . and stay and invest in the state. As for fraudsters wanting to come to New York:
ALL MONEY AIN'T GOOD MONEY.
Nope
Corporations that want to be "unchecked" can go to the other states and hope and pray that the A.G. there (or newly elected one day) will not take the lawsuit approach to cleaning up state authorized corporations. Corporations operate under state control or they will be sanctioned, fined, or dissolved.
New York will get clean businesses; that will be nice for everybody.
Now that light is entering New York business community. . . let the corporate "cockroaches" scatter like the bottom-feeders they are!
I can't wait until ny goes after someone else. When do you think that will happen?
The law that New York used is unique to New York so businesses who move to other states won't run into that risk. And this case was also unique in that this is the first time ever a DA requested a business be shut down without anyone suffering a loss. I'm more than willing to wait until all the appeals play out, it will be interesting to watch. But I suspect this will hurt New York in the long run due to the loss of capital investments.
When fraud/sters is found the state should seek resolution to it.
The saying goes, "If you build it: they will come." New York will prosper from good businesses and not a corrupt business community. It will 'blossom,' be beautiful, an vibrant in all its affairs—as it should. The A.G. executed her duties and responsibilities to the betterment of the state. Now then, if Trump stays or goes-he will conform to the rule of law in New York, fight to change the law to his liking, or go pull his. . .shtick. . .in new ground of operation.
The difference will be those new states upon his entry. . .will see him/his business coming!
States can make laws that protect themselves from fraud of this kind too.
They would have to look, there are plenty that have done exactly what Trump has done. Do you expect them to look for more or just be happy with the big fish they may have caught?
See 6.1.20.
So no, she is too busy.
I don't know what the New York A.G. will do after this case, but this one is now in the hands of the courts!
Not at all, I asked you a question. Following a thread really isn't that hard.
Please name one bank that lost money for this alleged fraud.
I don't think you can or will.
They didn't lose any money with Trump's loans and in fact wanted to continue to do business with him.
As usual, you can't support your assertions with any credible facts.
Being an idiot isn't a crime, but fraud is.
And they couldn't prove fraud. That is why this was a CIVIL court and not a criminal court.
Please document which banks lost millions as you claim, and specifically how much they actually lost.
Millions is just too vague to be seriously considered.
This is usually the part of the show where it just goes dead and complete silence takes over.
How did the banks "lose millions" if the loans were repaid in full with interest? Did you miss that part?
Please. For the love of. . .life. . .somehow, someway, I hope the "heavens" will allow this to end already one way or the other. Enough with the sanctimonious grandstanding. There are not enough narcissists in New York to warrant such a caution. Trump is unique in this one aspect.
Unique as in a malicious prosecution that had no victim.
Malicious prosecution
That is precisely what I wrote.
Nice copy and paste.
Name a victim or any entity that was defrauded--IF you can.
I don't think you can.
I get that. Probably seems like common sense to most people. But the law underpinning this suit empowers the attorney general to protect the marketplace against continuing fraud, and no complaining victim is required. If you like, the state is the victim.
You don't get it do you? They persecuted Trump for something probably every real estate investor does. Anybody who completes "any" paperwork can be accused of fraud and have a crazy ass prosecutor and Judge level a bankruptcy verdict against you when, no one has been harmed, no one has claimed a loss, no one has filed a complaint.
No one has been 'harmed' by the pretense of Biden's (speculative and impending) impeachment, but still you MAGAs be-dog the point! Get over it. The argument you are making does not appear to be over a matter of law, but over a whataboutism. And law is not situated to operate in regards to that one thing!
Trump's case in out of the hands of prosecutors and wholly in the hands of judges and justices at this point (should they decide to accept it).
If you want prosecutors to bring charges against all other similar cheaters. . . find them out. . . ask your D. A. to file charges and seek an indictment based on the merits involved. Complaining to us about what the 'system' is doing to Donald is not helping him or for that matter. . . us.
How do you know? You have no idea what he gave up for the money!
Ahh sheesh! Prove it already. Until you do, this is a dead thread on account of the lack of it.
Prove who or what was harmed in Trump's case.
Go!
That doesn't make it legal, does it?
Lots of people drive drunk and don't get caught...does that make it legal? No.
It’s ironic that the same crowd bashing Trump, having paid his loans, are for ripping off all Americans in a scheme to excuse legitimate college debt.
Great Point!!
About jury trials (according to the Judge Engoron) :
Still a travesty.
About fraud:
Continuation :
I do not know if this definition at 11 and 12 is suitable in this case, but from the appearance: First through Third "acts" above definitely were found to occur in this case by the perpetrator. "Acts" Four and Five may not have been clear to the A.G. who charged. Thus, it strikes me this why the route to action was a civil proceeding and not a criminal proceeding. In my opinion-only.