Doc Posted March 18 Posted March 18 1 hour ago, daz28 said: The only problem with your argument is that it's punitive in that it's to punish the behavior as well as compensate the victim. Sort of the same issue as there is with bail. Would a $5000 fine punish trump or curb the behavior? A $5000 fine would, however, cripple anyone living check to check. So the question is, what really is "excessive"? One could argue that because his wealth is excessive, the damages are not excessive to him. What is the basis for the judgment? Considering no one got hurt and no one involved is complaining? Why is $400+M enough punishment but $100M isn't?
daz28 Posted March 18 Posted March 18 7 minutes ago, Doc said: What is the basis for the judgment? Considering no one got hurt and no one involved is complaining? Why is $400+M enough punishment but $100M isn't? I don't have any idea what to go by. That was up to a judge, and will be up to an appeals judge now. My comments are basically that if a punishment isn't enough, then the wealthy are basically above the law. I already said that what excessive means is the question. I certainly don't have the answer.
Doc Posted March 18 Posted March 18 1 minute ago, daz28 said: I don't have any idea what to go by. That was up to a judge, and will be up to an appeals judge now. My comments are basically that if a punishment isn't enough, then the wealthy are basically above the law. I already said that what excessive means is the question. I certainly don't have the answer. Neither did they. They just made up a number.
daz28 Posted March 18 Posted March 18 3 minutes ago, Doc said: Neither did they. They just made up a number. I would assume that because a rich person pays the same parking ticket fine that a poor person pays would mean the appeals court will find it wildly excessive. My personal opinion is that the damages should be punitive in relation to the individual instead. Either way if he's as rich as he says he is it won't hurt him that much. If I went from having $5B to $4.5B I wouldn't be missing meals and having to fly coach.
BillStime Posted March 18 Posted March 18 23 minutes ago, Doc said: Neither did they. They just made up a number. If it's all fabricated, any competent legal representation should be able to assist him with the appeal. $168 million from lower interest rates, which were based on Trump’s personal guarantee to repay loans based on his false statements of net worth. $126.8 million in profit from converting the Old Post Office building in Washington, D.C. into a hotel, under a contract obtained through his use of false financial statements. $60 million in “windfall profit” from selling Ferry Point golf course in the Bronx, whose license agreement relied on his false financial statements, to Bally’s Corp. Trump expected to argue 'no victims' in appealing New York fraud case (usatoday.com) 1
Doc Posted March 18 Posted March 18 31 minutes ago, daz28 said: I would assume that because a rich person pays the same parking ticket fine that a poor person pays would mean the appeals court will find it wildly excessive. My personal opinion is that the damages should be punitive in relation to the individual instead. Either way if he's as rich as he says he is it won't hurt him that much. If I went from having $5B to $4.5B I wouldn't be missing meals and having to fly coach. What "damages"? Again, who was hurt? And making him have to come up with $400+M in 30 days was a real dick move and shows you their true nature. But hey, Trump's a jerk so it's all good, right?
BillStime Posted March 18 Posted March 18 16 minutes ago, Doc said: What "damages"? Again, who was hurt? New York's anti-fraud civil law does not require victims, Doc. And what would happen to you if you repeatedly misrepresented your financial statements? 17 minutes ago, Doc said: And making him have to come up with $400+M in 30 days was a real dick move and shows you their true nature. But hey, Trump's a jerk so it's all good, right? Hey Doc - keep whining over this pathetic billionaire you pathetic simp. 1
daz28 Posted March 18 Posted March 18 13 minutes ago, Doc said: What "damages"? Again, who was hurt? And making him have to come up with $400+M in 30 days was a real dick move and shows you their true nature. But hey, Trump's a jerk so it's all good, right? It's just a legal term, AGAIN don't blame me for it. I believe 30 days is fairly standard. Yes, he's a jerk. Again, poor people often have to come up with money they don't have. He supposedly has $5B. If he can't get a bond, that tells you they either feel he's not trustworthy or he doesn't really have the assets, which would be rich seeing that's why he's here in the first place. BT showed you how the number maybe isn't actually that far-fetched, harmed party or not. if he gained an unfair advantage, he should pay for it.
Doc Posted March 18 Posted March 18 4 minutes ago, daz28 said: It's just a legal term, AGAIN don't blame me for it. I believe 30 days is fairly standard. Yes, he's a jerk. Again, poor people often have to come up with money they don't have. He supposedly has $5B. If he can't get a bond, that tells you they either feel he's not trustworthy or he doesn't really have the assets, which would be rich seeing that's why he's here in the first place. BT showed you how the number maybe isn't actually that far-fetched, harmed party or not. if he gained an unfair advantage, he should pay for it. There needs to be a harmed party. Otherwise it's partisan chicanery with a crooked judge and DA who are no better than Trump. 1
BillStime Posted March 18 Posted March 18 40 minutes ago, Doc said: There needs to be a harmed party. Otherwise it's partisan chicanery with a crooked judge and DA who are no better than Trump. idiots
B-Man Posted March 20 Posted March 20 Two days to go ! Meanwhile: How would this tactic play out? Is it a trick? Link. https://nypost.com/2024/03/20/business/donald-trump-may-not-pay-bond-and-instead-let-letitia-james-seize-trump-tower-insiders/ I've been thinking about this. Trump could let the March 25th deadline arrive and force James to act. Let her seize Trump Tower. How will that look? How can she manage the place? What will people think? Is he calling her bluff? The 91 felony indictments helped Trump in the polls. His popularity could skyrocket if James confiscates his tower. The political value might exceed the half a billion dollars in wealth it will cost. In any case, it would be chaotic. One "insider" said: Click for more » https://althouse.blogspot.com/2024/03/how-would-this-tactic-play-out-is-it.html . 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 20 Posted March 20 On 3/18/2024 at 5:57 PM, daz28 said: I don't have any idea what to go by. That was up to a judge, and will be up to an appeals judge now. My comments are basically that if a punishment isn't enough, then the wealthy are basically above the law. I already said that what excessive means is the question. I certainly don't have the answer. The wealthy are often above the law. Our highest ranking politicians are often above the law. You just have to be the wrong type of wealthy, or the oppo politician at the wrong time.
Doc Posted March 20 Posted March 20 19 minutes ago, B-Man said: Two days to go ! Meanwhile: How would this tactic play out? Is it a trick? Link. https://nypost.com/2024/03/20/business/donald-trump-may-not-pay-bond-and-instead-let-letitia-james-seize-trump-tower-insiders/ I've been thinking about this. Trump could let the March 25th deadline arrive and force James to act. Let her seize Trump Tower. How will that look? How can she manage the place? What will people think? Is he calling her bluff? The 91 felony indictments helped Trump in the polls. His popularity could skyrocket if James confiscates his tower. The political value might exceed the half a billion dollars in wealth it will cost. In any case, it would be chaotic. One "insider" said: Click for more » https://althouse.blogspot.com/2024/03/how-would-this-tactic-play-out-is-it.html I think he should do this.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 20 Posted March 20 On 3/18/2024 at 7:07 PM, daz28 said: It's just a legal term, AGAIN don't blame me for it. I believe 30 days is fairly standard. Yes, he's a jerk. Again, poor people often have to come up with money they don't have. He supposedly has $5B. If he can't get a bond, that tells you they either feel he's not trustworthy or he doesn't really have the assets, which would be rich seeing that's why he's here in the first place. BT showed you how the number maybe isn't actually that far-fetched, harmed party or not. if he gained an unfair advantage, he should pay for it. With respect to a bond, it may well be that the fear of retaliation by NYS (or the Feds) drives the decision. There are a number of articles, and a number of commentators offering the opinion that what transpired was egregious. Corporations and wealthy people are not dumb, they know that what passes for justice is often malleable, and that Trump is public enemy number one. Who wants that heat?
Doc Posted March 21 Posted March 21 21 minutes ago, B-Man said: One day to go. I’ve been hearing he has until Monday.
B-Man Posted March 21 Posted March 21 1 minute ago, Doc said: I’ve been hearing he has until Monday. That's not what i was referring to Doc. (check the o.p.) 1
Governor Posted March 21 Posted March 21 (edited) On 3/18/2024 at 5:46 PM, Doc said: What is the basis for the judgment? Considering no one got hurt and no one involved is complaining? Why is $400+M enough punishment but $100M isn't? The judge added it all up and that’s what the amount is. They didn’t just make up a number. It’s listed in the case paperwork. There’s 400 million in fraud. He also owes 200 million on Trump tower so they will have to take a bunch of his properties. He took loans out on all of them. I don’t think the banks should get anything. They knew he was a fraud and still gave him money. They should lose their ass for that decision. Edited March 21 by Governor
Recommended Posts