Judge Engoron's $355 Million Fine Against Donald Trump May Have Far-Reaching Consequences

[jomar]

trump ran as a rule of law president. What that meant was “rules are for thee and not for me”

 

[Bn2f]

Burning people at the stake for being a witch wasn't a unique case either, and was also decided by judges and cheered on by mobs.

At no point have I seen a Republican or a Trump supporter say that the man is innocent. Nowhere. No time. Not by you or anyone. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I have not seen one conservative legal expert layout a legitimate argument against anyone of the 91 indictments for Trump supporters like you to come here and repeat as a defense.

 

[jomar]

Burning people at the stake for being a witch wasn't a unique case either, and was also decided by judges and cheered on by mobs.

Apt analogy. Well done!

 

[SmokingFap]

EXCLUSIVE: “New York Became My TOP Loser State” – Kevin O’Leary Speaks with The Gateway Pundit Following New York Judge’s “Attack on Every Entrepreneur in America”​

By Jordan Conradson Feb. 18, 2024 7:00 am

O’Leary described the decision to slap Trump with an over $355 million fine and bar Trump from doing business in New York as “an attack on the 11th sector of the S&P 500 and an attack on every entrepreneur in America,” adding, “That’s 100% what it is; It’s 100% Wrong.

Developers and REIT Investors “should be very, very worried that you can get this kind of inconsistency in policy,” said O’Leary. “It’s an attack on the whole sector of the economy, based on what?”

The non-jury Soviet-style show trial played out in court for eleven weeks. Judge Engoron delayed the verdict to mid-February after he demanded information about possible perjury by Trump Org. CFO Allen Weisselberg at the eleventh hour.

Radical Marxist New York Attorney General Letitia James brought this case against Trump with no victim, seeking to ban Trump and his sons from operating any businesses in New York. She accused Trump of inflating his assets and defrauding lenders and insurance companies. O’Leary responded, “My question is, what fraud, who was defrauded here? Who was harmed? I don’t understand.”

More on the Marxist Engoron here: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/exclusive-new-york-became-my-top-loser-state/

This idiocy could lead to the biggest business exodus in NY history.

O'Leary, one man of Shark Tank fame? Yeah, we'll see how many businesses leave the most valuable city in the US because they think Ol' Babydoll Hands was mistreated. Why do you care anyway? I would imagine you consider New York City to be the capital of elitist liberals. Maybe all those Trump-obsessed businesses will move to Florida and Texas.

 

[TastySuckToy]

At no point have I seen a Republican or a Trump supporter say that the man is innocent.

Because one is presumed innocent until proven guitly. This is a fundamental aspect of justice.

Nowhere. No time. Not by you or anyone. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I have not seen one conservative legal expert layout a legitimate argument against anyone of the 91 indictments for Trump supporters like you to come here and repeat as a defense.

In order to claim Trump is innocent, there has to be an actual crime in the first place.

The whole unilateral and without trial "victimless fraud" is as convincing as unilateral and without trial "victimless murder".

 

[ll74]

Because one is presumed innocent until proven guitly. This is a fundamental aspect of justice.

In order to claim Trump is innocent, there has to be an actual crime in the first place.

The whole unilateral and without trial "victimless fraud" is as convincing as unilateral and without trial "victimless murder".

The prosecutor established that the banks were cheated of the money from interest they should've received. It is certainly something that will be raised in the appelate court.

 

[Bn2f]

Because one is presumed innocent until proven guitly. This is a fundamental aspect of justice.

In order to claim Trump is innocent, there has to be an actual crime in the first place.

The whole unilateral and without trial "victimless fraud" is as convincing as unilateral and without trial "victimless murder".

Huh???

 

[Bn2f]

Because one is presumed innocent until proven guitly. This is a fundamental aspect of justice.

In order to claim Trump is innocent, there has to be an actual crime in the first place.

91 indictments brought before independent grand juries that determined that there was enough material evidence to warrant a trial is exactly how our judicial process was designed to work. No witch hunt. Just regular citizens coming together wanting more light shed on the subject. I have a feeling that you fear the process itself because you realize the potential consequences.

 

[Veroe]

At no point have I seen a Republican or a Trump supporter say that the man is innocent. Nowhere. No time. Not by you or anyone. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I have not seen one conservative legal expert layout a legitimate argument against anyone of the 91 indictments for Trump supporters like you to come here and repeat as a defense.

Because they are arguing that since no one was hurt we should just let this go... .oh no, golly gee, think of the precedent this sets.

But some one was hurt. The honest business owner that was denied a loan from that bank because Trump just had to fudge the numbers and not owe as much back to them.

 

[TastySuckToy]

The prosecutor established that the banks were cheated of the money from interest they should've received.

The banks decide what interest they will and should charge, not courts. If the banks thought they were cheated or their mutual agreements were not met, they would've taken Trump to court.

 

[TastySuckToy]

But some one was hurt. The honest business owner that was denied a loan from that bank because Trump just had to fudge the numbers and not owe as much back to them.

You think the loan interest rate negotiated between Trump and the bank somehow prevents some other unrelated business owner from getting a loan? What the hell are you smoking?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

BREAKING REPORT: Truckers Plan to Stop Shipments to NYC in Response to Political Hack Judge Engoron’s $350 Million Ruling Against Trump and His Sons (VIDEO)​

By Patty McMurray Feb. 17, 2024 5:20 pm

Truckers to the rescue—again.

Truckers bravely exposed some of the worst COVID shutdowns in the world when they parked their trucks in Ottowa to protest the iron-fisted approach used against citizens by the Justin Trudeau regime. Truckers in the US showed solidarity for their Canadian neighbors and helped block shipping between the US and Canada in Detroit, Michigan. Democrat Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who was being considered for Joe Biden’s VP, quickly threatened arrest for truckers who dared to block the Ambassador Bridge.

American truckers are now reportedly threatening to stop deliveries into New York City over the grotesque $350 million judgment against President Trump and his sons Don Jr. and Eric by partisan hack Judge Engoron on Friday.


Aside from first responders, is there another profession in the United States that proudly wears patriotism on its sleeves like the American trucker?

More here: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/breaking-report-truckers-plan-stop-shipments-nyc-response/

It would serve NY right.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1759609992121053466

https://twitter.com/x/status/1759613773885947926

ooooopsies.

MAGA snowflakes tried turning up the heat and melted again.

Hope you didn't prematurely pop your boner over this fail, Reichy.

 

[Rightguide]

If those businesses lie to their banks the same way Trump and his sons did, then good riddance to them.

It's about time we hold these swindlers to the standard we're supposed to hold them to.

You don't understand enough about the case to comment. There was no victim, there was no swindle, no laws were broken, and nobody lost any money.

 

[Rightguide]

Kevin O'Leary is a problem.

"O’Leary responded, “My question is, what fraud, who was defrauded here? Who was harmed? I don’t understand.”"

O'Leary speaks with the same mindset as Trump and his sons. It is that everybody got paid back; we made money on the art of the deal, no harm, no foul. It's all a perfect deal. I don't understand; how's that a bad thing?

Except the deal was based on multiple lies and perpetuated fraudulent lies. At the simplest level, Trump claimed his penthouse was 30,000 square feet, not the actual 9,996 square feet he knew it was for loan purposes. He lied, signed the loan papers knowing he lied, and spent the money to enrich himself based on that lie. Falsifying documents to obtain loans at a reduced rate was fraud against the State of New York and any other real estate investor seeking loans. Trump didn't just benefit a few dollars on the deal; he made millions off of it - and it was a clear prolonged pattern of behavior over years of lies.

NY applied the law to the lies - that's not inconsistency. It finally had enough of his malfeasant behavior, and they took action. New York will get a chance to correct Trump's financials for the next three years unless the appeals courts overturn the results of a fair trial decision.

They misapplied the law. That law has never before in NY history been used in that fashion. Inform yourself.

 

[TastySuckToy]

You don't understand enough about the case to comment. There was no victim, there was no swindle, no laws were broken, and nobody lost any money.

They're literally now crying the banks didn't make enough money off of Trump and that is somehow 'fraud'.

OMG, the banks didn't pocket enough interest money off of a loan agreement! Criminal!!

Can't wait for them to apply this standard to something like, oh I dunno, student loans. The poor banks are being frauded by not getting enough interest profit! Quick! Bang the gavel and find students guilty of fraud without trial because they obtained a loan under false pretenses. Because said students aren't doing the jobs they studied for or making the money they thought they would.

 

[Bn2f]

You don't understand enough about the case to comment. There was no victim, there was no swindle, no laws were broken, and nobody lost any money.

Because they are arguing that since no one was hurt we should just let this go... .oh no, golly gee, think of the precedent this sets.

But some one was hurt. The honest business owner that was denied a loan from that bank because Trump just had to fudge the numbers and not owe as much back to them.

Hmmmmm.
Sounds like to me that this is the exact point Veroe is making.
Do you need an energy drink?

 

[Rightguide]

They're literally now crying the banks didn't make enough money off of Trump and that is somehow 'fraud'.

OMG, the banks didn't pocket enough interest money off of a loan agreement! Criminal!!

Can't wait for them to apply this standard to something like, oh I dunno, student loans. The poor banks are being frauded by not getting enough interest profit! Quick! Bang the gavel and find students guilty of fraud without trial because they obtained a loan under false pretenses. Because said students aren't doing the jobs they studied for or making the money they thought they would.

One has to ask, how many of them are lining up to contribute a little bit more to their car or house payments just to ensure the viability of their neighborhood bank?

 

[ll74]

One has to ask, how many of them are lining up to contribute a little bit more to their car or house payments just to ensure the viability of their neighborhood bank?

Yes, because that is an apt comparison

¯⁠\⁠(⁠°⁠_⁠o⁠)⁠/⁠¯

 

[DeluxAuto]

Who would the MAGAts blame when their government funded Similac is out of stock and their welfare babies are starving?

Obama?

 

[Rightguide]

Yes, because that is an apt comparison

¯⁠\⁠(⁠°⁠_⁠o⁠)⁠/⁠¯

Even the clueless at MSNBC gets it:

MSNBC Host Has Questions on the Legitimacy of Trump’s New York Business Ban​

Sarah Arnold | February 18, 2024 1:30 PM

MSNBC host Katy Tur is questioning the legitimacy of whether the ban against former President Trump's businesses is "fair."

On Friday, Trump was ordered to pay over $350 million in damages and banned from running his business in New York for three years in a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Tur highlighted the 70-year-old legal rule, the New York Civil Practice Law, Judge Arthur Engoron used to determine the outcome of Trump’s trial. She pointed out that it has never been used against a person who has yet to be proven to be doing harm to any individual or entity with their practice.

“[The rule] doesn't have to show the harm done. It's not the burden. You don't have to show that anybody was hurt by your practices. There's nobody you defrauded specifically,” Tur said. “They looked at 150 cases over 70 years and found there was no case where there was a ban on doing business where there wasn't harm shown. So even though the threshold is harm shown, in the past, it has only been used to ban someone doing business when it's been shown that somebody was hurt, say you're selling cosmetics that are poisoning you. Is it fair to go after Donald Trump like this in this environment, is my question?”

More here on how far from reality 1174 and Engoron are:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/sarah...macy-of-trumps-new-york-business-ban-n2635401

 

[TastySuckToy]

Could you imagine if this was happening to someone else?

-Homeowner wants to build a second home.
-Homeowner goes to bank, negotiates loan agreement based upon mutually agreed upon valuation of first home.
-Terms and conditions are met, bank is paid off with interest, both bank and home owner are happy.

-Judge shows up, bangs gavel, declares home owner guilty of fraud without trial, says home isn't worth what the home owner and bank agreed it was worth.
-Judge initiates trial to see if home owner and bank documentation reflects the afore mentioned fraud determination.
-Both home owner and bank protest in court that terms and conditions were all met, both parties happy.
-Judge declares fraud can be victimless crime.
-Home owner fined huge amounts of money and denied right to do business again for years.

Leftist/Democrats hail the outcome as justice, mock any claims the outcome ia absolutely ridiculous and other home owners are extremely worried about the precedent this sets.

 

[ll74]

Even the clueless at MSNBC gets it:

MSNBC Host Has Questions on the Legitimacy of Trump’s New York Business Ban​

Sarah Arnold | February 18, 2024 1:30 PM

MSNBC host Katy Tur is questioning the legitimacy of whether the ban against former President Trump's businesses is "fair."

On Friday, Trump was ordered to pay over $350 million in damages and banned from running his business in New York for three years in a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James.

Tur highlighted the 70-year-old legal rule, the New York Civil Practice Law, Judge Arthur Engoron used to determine the outcome of Trump’s trial. She pointed out that it has never been used against a person who has yet to be proven to be doing harm to any individual or entity with their practice.

“[The rule] doesn't have to show the harm done. It's not the burden. You don't have to show that anybody was hurt by your practices. There's nobody you defrauded specifically,” Tur said. “They looked at 150 cases over 70 years and found there was no case where there was a ban on doing business where there wasn't harm shown. So even though the threshold is harm shown, in the past, it has only been used to ban someone doing business when it's been shown that somebody was hurt, say you're selling cosmetics that are poisoning you. Is it fair to go after Donald Trump like this in this environment, is my question?”

More here on how far from reality 1174 and Engoron are:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/sarah...macy-of-trumps-new-york-business-ban-n2635401

Evidence was presented and a ruling was made. He will appeal.

You playing lawyer like Rapey on the validity of the ruling doesn't matter to me.

I also don't care how many media outlets that you find that agree with you.

 

[Rightguide]

Evidence was presented and a ruling was made. He will appeal.

You playing lawyer like Rapey on the validity of the ruling doesn't matter to me.

I also don't care how many media outlets that you find that agree with you.

Yes, I know your knowledge of everything is modulated by your stage 4 TDS.

 

[Rightguide]

Evidence was presented and a ruling was made. He will appeal.

You playing lawyer like Rapey on the validity of the ruling doesn't matter to me.

I also don't care how many media outlets that you find that agree with you.

I'm not a lawyer. I just know a lot more than you do about the law.

 

[ll74]

Yes, I know your knowledge of everything is modulated by your stage 4 TDS.

You keep saying that yet fail to produce any proof of threads I've made about him.

I don't like him and specifically his foreign policy. I won't ever vote for him. That opinion is rooted in factual information about him.