The Trials Of Donald Trump

[easyrider16]

Related question. How is it that he can use campaign funds to pay his legal fees, which have nothing to do with campaigning?

Probably something that will be litigated at some point. I believe from what I've read that it's a pretty broad definition of what legal bills are related to the campaign. I imagine Trump's people would say these are politically-motivated charges having to do with the fact that he is running for office, and therefore they are all related to the campaign. Not sure if that flies if challenged in court. I guess it probably depends on the specifics of each case, because some of these cases do have to do with his campaign, such as the allegations that he tried to rig the outcome of 2020. The Trump org stuff is a much harder sell as most of those allegations were from before he ever ran for office and/or seem totally unrelated.

[Skid Mark]

“Economic Assassination” : a rabidly anti-Trump New York judge creates a “fraud” case with no victim, no complaints and no losses. With no jury the anti-Trump petty dictator finds Trump a half billion dollars, exiles the President and his sons from New York business for three years and blocks all New York banks from loaning Trump the money to pay the fine. Equally rabid anti-trump New York Attorney General announces she will seize Trump’s buildings and other property unless he puts up half billion in escrow. You don’t need Siberia to destroy an opponent if you have New York."

- Newt

Y'all claim to hate Putin but celebrate when our government uses tactics similar to his.

[Bubba]

“Economic Assassination” : a rabidly anti-Trump New York judge creates a “fraud” case with no victim, no complaints and no losses. With no jury the anti-Trump petty dictator finds Trump a half billion dollars, exiles the President and his sons from New York business for three years and blocks all New York banks from loaning Trump the money to pay the fine. Equally rabid anti-trump New York Attorney General announces she will seize Trump’s buildings and other property unless he puts up half billion in escrow. You don’t need Siberia to destroy an opponent if you have New York."

- Newt

Y'all claim to hate Putin but celebrate when our government uses tactics similar to his.

Except that the judge ruled following a full legal trial and the judgment is subject to appeal. I don't believe being poisoned or thrown out a window is subject to the same legal process, do you?

[easyrider16]

I find it pretty amusing that someone thinks the way courts operate in New York bears any remote similarity to the legal process in Putin's Russia. I mean talk about ignorance.

The other thing that just makes me think MAGA people are not very smart is that conservatives have a 6-3 majority at the highest court in the land. If there were really violations of Trump's Constitutional rights, why isn't the Supreme Court taking his appeal and setting it right? How naive are you MAGA people?

[Skid Mark]

I find it pretty amusing that someone thinks the way courts operate in New York bears any remote similarity to the legal process in Putin's Russia. I mean talk about ignorance.

The other thing that just makes me think MAGA people are not very smart is that conservatives have a 6-3 majority at the highest court in the land. If there were really violations of Trump's Constitutional rights, why isn't the Supreme Court taking his appeal and setting it right? How naive are you MAGA people?

Turning a blind eye to the injustice of this case tells me all I need to know about you, comrade.

[easyrider16]

Turning a blind eye to the injustice of this case tells me all I need to know about you, comrade.

What injustices would those be exactly? Was he denied counsel? The ability to call witnesses on his own behalf or mount a defense? The right to appeal?

Let's break down your Newt quote:

a rabidly anti-Trump New York judge creates a “fraud” case with no victim, no complaints and no losses.

The judge didn't bring the case and doesn't have the power to do that. The New York Attorney General, who is elected by popular vote, brought the case. Under New York law, there does not have to be a victim, complaint, or loss. The reason for that should be obvious - if two businesses engage in fraudulent transactions to the benefit of both, it undermines the reliability and integrity of our business and financial system. It is this kind of fraud that led to the 2008 financial crisis, for example.

With no jury the anti-Trump petty dictator finds Trump a half billion dollars, exiles the President and his sons from New York business for three years and blocks all New York banks from loaning Trump the money to pay the fine.

This is a civil case under New York law and he was not entitled to a jury trial. This is no different for anyone who is accused of similar business transgressions in New York. This judge is not a dictator. In New York judges like Engoron are elected by the public. As for the penalties, again these are no different than any other business would face if found liable, and the amount of the fine is calculated based on the transactions themselves, which here were for many millions of dollars.

Equally rabid anti-trump New York Attorney General announces she will seize Trump’s buildings and other property unless he puts up half billion in escrow. You don’t need Siberia to destroy an opponent if you have New York."

This is no more or less than a statement of the law. If you get a judgment against you in any state of the union, and you fail to pay it, your assets can be seized. That shouldn't be a problem for Trump, who is allegedly a billionaire, and realistically should have no problem putting up the bond or paying the fine outright.

Have you looked at the actual facts of this case? It is undisputed that Trump misrepresented and inflated the value of his assets, for example claiming his Trump Tower apartment was 30,000 square feet when in fact it was 10,000 square feet. That's one of many examples of his alleged fraud. Do you think it should be allowed for people to misrepresent this kind of information on financial forms? Do you think it would be okay for you, for example, to claim your house is 6,000 square feet when it's only 2,000 square feet when you apply for a mortgage so you can get more money?

[Skid Mark]

Wow, are you Rachel Maddow?

Just read up on what many people with experience in the NYC real estate market are saying (like Kevin O-Leary).

The case is bogus and very frightening for our republic. You know it, I know it, so quit with your insane defense. You sound like a fool.

[easyrider16]

Just read up on what many people with experience in the NYC real estate market are saying (like Kevin O-Leary).

I have. I think O'Leary is pretty off base on his comments. Example:

"Remember there is no money lost, there's no victim here, so essentially just under half a billion-dollar fine for a situation where no monies were lost and the harmed party, supposedly the banks, were fully paid back," he said. "We are wondering does this make sense, asking ourselves how long will it take for the appellate court to bring down to a what reasonable number might be, I have no idea what that is."

Again, refer to what I said above. The law does not require there to be a victim or money lost. I think he has a point that an appellate court is likely to reduce the fine, though - but that doesn't mean the case is baseless, just that the penalty might have been a little much. But Trump isn't being denied any rights, he has the right to appeal and he has.

"Capital comes to America because of the stability of the justice system," he said. "This is not stable, in terms of many people’s eyes, domestically and internationally, seizing assets happens in Venezuela, it doesn’t happen in New York. So this is a little scary."

This is total nonsense. Assets are seized all the time in the U.S. following a trial and imposition of fines/penalties. Just ask Sam Bankmen Fried.

The case is bogus and very frightening for our republic.

Do you have a basis for this? Or are you just taking other people's word for it? Again, have you actually looked at the underlying facts of the case, or are you just basing your opinions on what you read/see on right wing media?

The reason Trump is in this position is that he did something wrong. I'll agree that if Trump wasn't such a high-profile political figure, he likely would have gotten away with it. But that's no different from any politician in the public eye - if they have skeletons, they are brought out. Just ask Weiner or Clinton.

[deadheadskier]

Wow, are you Rachel Maddow?

Just read up on what many people with experience in the NYC real estate market are saying (like Kevin O-Leary).

The case is bogus and very frightening for our republic. You know it, I know it, so quit with your insane defense. You sound like a fool.

As someone who in 2024 is still completely hoodwinked by a NYC Con man and the most verifiably dishonest former President of modern times, it's rich of you to call ANYONE a fool. You people truly are blind cultists

[easyrider16]

Here's a link to the actual summary judgment decision that contains the judge's findings of fact:
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/s ... 240216.pdf

A quick perusal and you find things like:

• Trump misrepresented that the Triplex apartment in which he resided for decades was 30,000 square feet when it was actually 10,996 square feet;

• Trump misrepresented that he had permission to build 2,500 private residences in Aberdeen though he only had permission for 500;

• Trump misrepresented that 40 Wall Street had a net operating income of $64 million despite the fact that it was actually operating at a deficit

• Trump's lieutenant directed his people to remove management fees as expenses when calculating net operating income for certain properties

• Trump misrepresented the value of apartments at Trump Park Avenue based on an offering price that failed to reflect that the apartments were rent-restricted

• Trump represented a valuation for Seven Springs that was many times more than what multiple appraisers he hired valued it at

There's lots of other things, like how they would appraisal shop and provide different appraisers with different underlying assumptions to get to the desired valuations. Or he would cite certain appraisers to justify a reported valuation when those appraisers never actually provided a valuation. Or his people would just outright misreport what an appraiser valued a property at to insurers or lenders. Etc. etc. ad nauseam.

If you want to tell me the ultimate number for the fine is too high, or even that this is a politically-motivated prosecution, I'm willing to listen. But I don't think you can dispute that Trump made numerous fraudulent representations in his business dealings. If he wasn't doing unscrupulous things in his business dealings, he would not be in this mess.

[Bubba]

"Remember there is no money lost, there's no victim here, so essentially just under half a billion-dollar fine for a situation where no monies were lost and the harmed party, supposedly the banks, were fully paid back," he said. "We are wondering does this make sense, asking ourselves how long will it take for the appellate court to bring down to a what reasonable number might be, I have no idea what that is."

This is actually an admission and confirmation that the case is not bogus, even in the eyes of O'Leary. He's not disputing the facts or that there was wrongdoing, merely the amount of the fine.

[easyrider16]

The damages number seems crazy high, but when you actually read the judge's decision, he does have a rational basis for it. It's based on the amount the organization allegedly saved by securing lower rates of interest on loans obtained using fraudulent representations. I'm guessing there's some room for debate on how exactly that's calculated.

This case is far from over and will likely drag on for years. There's a good chance it gets remanded back to the trial court, then goes back up to the appeals court, etc. In the end, I doubt the finding of fraudulent conduct will be overturned, but I suspect the fine will likely get reduced.

[Skid Mark]

Many people, including legal scholars and liberal pundits think this trial was a sham. No jury allowed, liberal judge who already found Trump guilty, a DA who campaigned on getting Trump, and laws changed so that the charges could be made. Mar-o-lago valued at 18 million when it is worth 500 million+. It is widely known that all developers do what Trump did because the banks are responsible for doing their own due diligence.

How does the 450million penalty make any sense? This is lawfare designed to hurt Trump. That's how scared you libs are of this man.

You should stop defending this sham now because you will look like complete jackasses once the appeal goes through.

[easyrider16]

Many people, including legal scholars and liberal pundits think this trial was a sham. No jury allowed, liberal judge who already found Trump guilty, a DA who campaigned on getting Trump, and laws changed so that the charges could be made. Mar-o-lago valued at 18 million when it is worth 500 million+. It is widely known that all developers do what Trump did because the banks are responsible for doing their own due diligence.

I answered some of this above and won't repeat myself, but this business of Mar-o-lago being valued at 18 million is a right-wing media talking point that is basically a lie. Neither the judge nor the prosecution claimed Mar-o-lago was worth 18 million. The property is assessed by the town it is located in as being worth $18-27 million. This is just one of many misreportings about the case.

See here:
https://www.businessinsider.com/donald- ... ict-2024-2

Also, it's laughable that most developers do what Trump did here - if they did, they'd get into trouble the way Trump did. Again, look at the facts of the case rather than what pundits are claiming. It's one thing to make a claim that a property is worth more than it is, which I agree developers do regularly. It's another thing entirely to claim that an independent appraiser said it was worth something when that appraiser said no such thing, or to misrepresent the square footage or other features of a property to artificially inflate its value.

How does the 450million penalty make any sense? This is lawfare designed to hurt Trump. That's how scared you libs are of this man.

You should stop defending this sham now because you will look like complete jackasses once the appeal goes through.

I'm not "defending" anything. This is not my case to defend. But I feel compelled to point out that a lot of what the right wing is saying about this case is bogus. If the appeal upholds the judge's verdict, but reduces the fine (as I said it possibly would), will you admit that it was not a sham and Trump is in fact a crook?

[deadheadskier]

What I find amusing with this entire case is Trump argued the whole time he's worth so much more money than represented. That he had $400 million in cash.

Now when it comes to posting bond for an appeal his lawyers say he only has $100M and would need to sell assets to meet bond obligations.

There isn't a thing this con man doesn't lie about. Yet cultists like Skidmark and FancyPants believe everything this liar says. It's unbelievable that tens of millions of Americans can't plainly see what a lying fraud he is. It's like watching a child lie. It's so obvious.