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

[Rotadom]

The judge didn't do anything coherently. No one has ever used this law in this manner in history. It's all bullshit. It will be overturned on appeal. He pre-judged the case before the trial even started. The whole thing was undemocratic and without legal basis.

Have you noticed how many of your posts defending the trump crime family are almost exactly like this one?

"The judge is wrong!"
"The DA is a bitch!"

And why do you have so many of these?

 

[Lazaran]

I’m curious. Please explain how pawn shops, which are essentially yard sale negotiations about what the market will bear, are the same as lying to banks year after year about the about how much more your property is worth to get a loan, and signing off legally, then on the back end lying about how much less it’s worth in order to pay back less. Perhaps I misunderstand.

I made the same point.

No response.

Apparently TaintyFuckBoi has left the chat,

 

[jomar]

I made the same point.
No response.

Apparently TaintyFuckBoi has left the chat,

He has an analogy deficiency

 

[dmallord]

Have you noticed how many of your posts defending the trump crime family are almost exactly like this one?

"The judge is wrong!"
"The DA is a bitch!"

And why do you have so many of these?

Conjecture: A lack of vocabulary? Just guessing.

They flaunt their superior knowledge base yet lack analytical thinking skills to arrive at logical conclusions that most people perceive as common sense derivatives.

Not only are judges wrong, but they also don't understand the legal basis on which they make their erroneous judgments, and of course, every one of those cases will be overturned on appeal. That next judge will understand, of course.

I hope they don't get upset when the appeals run out and that level of judgment concurs with lower court proceedings. That would really give them a chapped @sshole.

 

[icanhelp1]

Conjecture: A lack of vocabulary? Just guessing.

They flaunt their superior knowledge base yet lack analytical thinking skills to arrive at logical conclusions that most people perceive as common sense derivatives.

Not only are judges wrong, but they also don't understand the legal basis on which they make their erroneous judgments, and of course, every one of those cases will be overturned on appeal. That next judge will understand, of course.

I hope they don't get upset when the appeals run out and that level of judgment concurs with lower court proceedings. That would really give them a chapped @sshole.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1758877708925177883

https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...testing-the-new-york-legal-systems-integrity/

Obscene award against Trump is testing the New York legal system’s integrity​

Undervaluing and overvaluing property is a longstanding practice in New York real estate. The forms submitted by the Trump organization cautioned the banks to do their own estimates and the loans were paid in full and on time. Yet, the New York law used by James is a curiosity because it does not actually require a victim. Indeed, everyone can make ample profits and still allow for an investigation into “repeated fraudulent or illegal acts.”

Having campaigned on bagging Trump on any basis, James turned the law into a virtual license to hunt him down along with his family and his associates.

Engoron proved the perfect judge for the case. The opinion itself seems almost cathartic for the jurist who struggled with Trump inside and outside of court. In the judgment, Engoron fulfilled Oscar Wilde’s rule that the only way to be rid of temptation is to yield to it. He ordered everything short of throwing Trump into a wood chipper.

The size of the damages is grotesque and should shock the conscience of any judge on appeal. Even if the Democrat-appointed judges on the New York Court of Appeals were to ignore the obvious inequity

 

[Chobham]

Lol.... This is not a unique case, except for the asshole in the defendant chair.

No it's not unique in the least. And there is no parenthetical clause in the law that says, "applies to Donald J Trump only" and the business community is well aware of that. This is a precedent, and if allowed to stand, will allow the state to raid any business at any time based on the notion that "this is a special case."

 

[dmallord]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1758877708925177883

https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...testing-the-new-york-legal-systems-integrity/

Obscene award against Trump is testing the New York legal system’s integrity​

Undervaluing and overvaluing property is a longstanding practice in New York real estate. The forms submitted by the Trump organization cautioned the banks to do their own estimates and the loans were paid in full and on time. Yet, the New York law used by James is a curiosity because it does not actually require a victim. Indeed, everyone can make ample profits and still allow for an investigation into “repeated fraudulent or illegal acts.”

Having campaigned on bagging Trump on any basis, James turned the law into a virtual license to hunt him down along with his family and his associates.

Engoron proved the perfect judge for the case. The opinion itself seems almost cathartic for the jurist who struggled with Trump inside and outside of court. In the judgment, Engoron fulfilled Oscar Wilde’s rule that the only way to be rid of temptation is to yield to it. He ordered everything short of throwing Trump into a wood chipper.

The size of the damages is grotesque and should shock the conscience of any judge on appeal. Even if the Democrat-appointed judges on the New York Court of Appeals were to ignore the obvious inequity

Johnathon Turley's hyperbole-laden opinion article in The Hill is one person's viewpoint. The Hill's small print statement above the article notes that it does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the publisher as a protective statement to cover itself from the appearance of bias. That's well and good. The tone taken in this reference reflects Turley's attempt to paint Judge Engoron as overzealous in finding Trump guilty, as noted by the "... throwing Trump into the wood chipper." remark.

Professor Turley is a noted legal scholar who often publishes and contributes articles as a paid consultant to organizations such as Fox News. If you don't 'puff up' your news article to draw in readers, a consultant isn't likely to make money or the publisher either. The Washington Post once quoted him as saying, "I suggest The Washington Post follow the legal rule de minimis non curat lex -- 'the law does not concern itself with trifles.' I am a trifle as are the other commentators in the media."

In other words, Turley suggests that his view is one of many in the free press, no greater or no less than anyone else's view. Neither is the viewpoint expressed by icanhelp1 nor my own as the humble opinion of a Literotica member and contributor.

One should read widely, from different perspectives, and reach their own conclusions about the case's merits. Look at the preponderance of the evidence, so to speak, and see if it squares and represents a sound decision. This case, as noted, is novel. Never applied before in this manner, but then the situation is also novel, as is the accused. The legal bounds of the law have always been evolving; they have in this case. Does it hold merit? That may or may not be the case. The appeals process may find that out. Meanwhile, the public court of opinion stands in the wings for a chance to be heard.

Engoron finally reined in Trump's continued violation of slandering the complainant - by using a substantial fine. Readers should note Donald Trump failed to adhere to the gag orders when the fines for failure to follow those orders were a paltry 15,000 dollar amount. Other news sources, by other scholars, point out that the fine was within the six-to-one commonly accepted ratio for such cases. True, it is a very large amount and beyond the norm. Then again, Donald is not prone to follow a legal order to refrain from slandering his victims in the public eye. Trump has since stopped his slander. Evidently, the amount awarded had the right effect.

 

[HisArpy]

Our Father, in Heaven ... please make HisArpy stop trying to convince the world he is utterly ... [prayerfully fill in your thoughts here.]

What is this; thoughts and prayers? I thought your rampant socialistic atheism prohibited such a thing.

 

[HisArpy]

No it's not unique in the least. And there is no parenthetical clause in the law that says, "applies to Donald J Trump only" and the business community is well aware of that. This is a precedent, and if allowed to stand, will allow the state to raid any business at any time based on the notion that "this is a special case."

Business understands exactly what happened and understands that government does not obey the boundaries which limit it. One need only look at the history of the Patriot Act to see this in real time.

Engoron's verdict and decision will be overturned on appeal. This will not inhibit the financial flight of money away from NY.

 

[HisArpy]

We're now at the point where he's actually trying to argue that prices and value aren't the same thing. Prices are literally the mechanism by which we measure value.

This is getting ridiculously sad.

He is not alone. This forum is filled with other mentally wonderous people who cannot fathom how the world around them actually works and instead insist that it somehow functions in ways which are inconceivable and impossible.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

He is not alone. This forum is filled with other mentally wonderous people who cannot fathom how the world around them actually works and instead insist that it somehow functions in ways which are inconceivable and impossible.

Right, but you know the answer; it all runs on carbon based water...

 

[HisArpy]

Right, but you know the answer; it all runs on carbon based water...

Of course.

Which is why you don't understand anything about how things really work.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Of course.

Which is why you don't understand anything about how things really work.

lol, Thanks for admitting you know nothing of how the world works.

 

[HisArpy]

lol, Thanks for admitting you know nothing of how the world works.

And yet somehow I've been correct on the outcome of the subjects of discussion most of the time.

While you have not.

Which is a factor a smart individual would take into consideration when determining who understands how things work.

Again, something you have not.


Which leads to more than one inescapable conclusion, none of which increase your prognostication skills or stature in the eyes of the world.

 

[Sean Renaud]

When was the last time you were correct about anything?

 

[dmallord]

What is this; thoughts and prayers? I thought your rampant socialistic atheism prohibited such a thing.

You thought wrongly on this issue - case in point - wrong on both thoughts.

 

[Rightguide]

Of course which is why you rely on lengthy articles by other people.

You have yet to refute a legal position I've posted. You'll be getting another ass-kicking from the SCOTUS any day now.

 

[Rightguide]

I honestly never knew that pawn shops gave loans.

Negotiating prices is not the same thing as lying about value. If I sign my name and knowingly overvalue an item... That is fraud.

Negotiating a value means both parties are honest brokers in the deal.

You need to leave the house every once in a while.

 

[Rightguide]

When was the last time you were correct about anything?

No doubt the last time he replied to you.

 

[Rightguide]

Johnathon Turley's hyperbole-laden opinion article in The Hill is one person's viewpoint. The Hill's small print statement above the article notes that it does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the publisher as a protective statement to cover itself from the appearance of bias. That's well and good. The tone taken in this reference reflects Turley's attempt to paint Judge Engoron as overzealous in finding Trump guilty, as noted by the "... throwing Trump into the wood chipper." remark.

Professor Turley is a noted legal scholar who often publishes and contributes articles as a paid consultant to organizations such as Fox News. If you don't 'puff up' your news article to draw in readers, a consultant isn't likely to make money or the publisher either. The Washington Post once quoted him as saying, "I suggest The Washington Post follow the legal rule de minimis non curat lex -- 'the law does not concern itself with trifles.' I am a trifle as are the other commentators in the media."

In other words, Turley suggests that his view is one of many in the free press, no greater or no less than anyone else's view. Neither is the viewpoint expressed by icanhelp1 nor my own as the humble opinion of a Literotica member and contributor.

One should read widely, from different perspectives, and reach their own conclusions about the case's merits. Look at the preponderance of the evidence, so to speak, and see if it squares and represents a sound decision. This case, as noted, is novel. Never applied before in this manner, but then the situation is also novel, as is the accused. The legal bounds of the law have always been evolving; they have in this case. Does it hold merit? That may or may not be the case. The appeals process may find that out. Meanwhile, the public court of opinion stands in the wings for a chance to be heard.

Engoron finally reined in Trump's continued violation of slandering the complainant - by using a substantial fine. Readers should note Donald Trump failed to adhere to the gag orders when the fines for failure to follow those orders were a paltry 15,000 dollar amount. Other news sources, by other scholars, point out that the fine was within the six-to-one commonly accepted ratio for such cases. True, it is a very large amount and beyond the norm. Then again, Donald is not prone to follow a legal order to refrain from slandering his victims in the public eye. Trump has since stopped his slander. Evidently, the amount awarded had the right effect.

Total idiocy

 

[Rightguide]

Hate to break it to you, Reichguide, but all NYC businesspeople are already aware of which way the city leans politically.
And they've known for decades what the rest of the world has learned about Trump since 2016.

Then explain how they would be aware of a legal eventuality that was never contemplated and has never occurred in their state's history. There has never been a similar case or a legal construction or application of the NY statute as that handed down by Judge Engoron. It was a made-up ruling by a rogue judge who decided the case before it even started. I hate to break it to you but the law isn't supposed to be "politically" driven.

 

[TastySuckToy]

Then explain how they would be aware of a legal eventuality that was never contemplated and has never occurred in their state's history. There has never been a similar case or a legal construction or application of the NY statute as that handed down by Judge Engoron. It was a made-up ruling by a rogue judge who decided the case before it even started. I hate to break it to you but the law isn't supposed to be "politically" driven.

And it's pretty obvious that this outcome is utterly ridiculous and unprecedented, which is why the New York Gov is literally trying to assure other NY businesses that this won't happen to them.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/thehill...out-trump-verdict-nothing-to-worry-about/amp/

Hochul tells NY businesses not to fear about Trump verdict: ‘Nothing to worry about’​

“I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior,” Hochul responded.

Why is there a need to assure business operators in NY that this won't happen to them? Shouldn't it happen to them, if they do what Trump supposedly did that was unilaterally and without trial declared fraud and criminal? She literally admitting they're treating Trump in a very unusual and extraordinary way.

Why is she claiming this is a special and unusual circumstance? If Trump is guilty of fraud and criminal behavior with his real estate business, shouldn't the Gov be saying this is how they will treat all businesses that do what Trump did?

 

[RoryN]

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

Oopsie doodle.

MAGA Trucker Does A 180 After Trying To Start A Boycott Of NYC Over Donald Trump’s $355M Fine

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/maga-trucker-does-180-trying-123056407.html

 

[Rightguide]

And it's pretty obvious that this outcome is utterly ridiculous and unprecedented, which is why the New York Gov is literally trying to assure other NY businesses that this won't happen to them.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/thehill...out-trump-verdict-nothing-to-worry-about/amp/

Hochul tells NY businesses not to fear about Trump verdict: ‘Nothing to worry about’​

Why is there a need to assure business operators in NY that this won't happen to them? Shouldn't it happen to them, if they do what Trump supposedly did that was unilaterally and without trial declared fraud and criminal? She literally admitting they're treating Trump in a very unusual and extraordinary way.

Why is she claiming this is a special and unusual circumstance? If Trump is guilty of fraud and criminal behavior with his real estate business, shouldn't the Gov be saying this is how they will treat all businesses that do what Trump did?

Yes, everything will be fine in NY as long as you knuckle under and accept our un-American totalitarian thinking.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

And it's pretty obvious that this outcome is utterly ridiculous and unprecedented, which is why the New York Gov is literally trying to assure other NY businesses that this won't happen to them.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/thehill...out-trump-verdict-nothing-to-worry-about/amp/

Hochul tells NY businesses not to fear about Trump verdict: ‘Nothing to worry about’​

Why is there a need to assure business operators in NY that this won't happen to them? Shouldn't it happen to them, if they do what Trump supposedly did that was unilaterally and without trial declared fraud and criminal? She literally admitting they're treating Trump in a very unusual and extraordinary way.

Why is she claiming this is a special and unusual circumstance? If Trump is guilty of fraud and criminal behavior with his real estate business, shouldn't the Gov be saying this is how they will treat all businesses that do what Trump did?

Governor Hochul says this is "an extraordinary and unusual circumstance" because most businesspeople in New York are law-abiding and follow the rules--unlike Donald Trump.