364 million verdict against the trumpster

[Stuffshot]

That's fair. As all are well aware, I don't care for Trump even a little bit, but this case is one that probably shouldn't have happened. He may in fact be liable under NY law, but there's no denying that this case is totally political. James ran on the promise of getting Trump for something and even if legit that's not the way things should be done. Trump is doing the same promising to get Trump and all those he claims are involved in his "persecution," including Biden. This is third world stuff, not first world.

It's one thing to say you're going to "get" somebody, when the evidence shows they didn't do it.

It's another thing to say you're going to "get" somebody, but the evidence shows they did do it.

Every single prosecutor running for election says he/she will be "tough on crime" in one form or another.

Remember another thing: Trump's liability was established in a ruling on motions for summary judgment filed by both sides:

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23991876/trump-ny-fraud-ruling.pdf

Both sides claimed the evidence was clearcut and undisputed. No matter what James said about Trump, the ruling depends on evidence. Nothing she said changes that.

 

[Stuffshot]

I hear from good sources that The Don has taken up painting and will have no problem raising $ to cover this. There's nothin this man can't do !

How many gold sneakers has he sold?

 

[Stuffshot]

She has now moved to start confiscating his golf club north of Manhattan. It will be hilarious if she over valuates it to meet his debit....

Aren't the relevant valuations the ones that Trump used?

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

It's one thing to say you're going to "get" somebody, when the evidence shows they didn't do it.

It's another thing to say you're going to "get" somebody, but the evidence shows they did do it.

Every single prosecutor running for election says he/she will be "tough on crime" in one form or another.

Remember another thing: Trump's liability was established in a ruling on motions for summary judgment filed by both sides:

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23991876/trump-ny-fraud-ruling.pdf

Both sides claimed the evidence was clearcut and undisputed. No matter what James said about Trump, the ruling depends on evidence. Nothing she said changes that.

You just can’t help yourself. I said he may well be liable per NY law, but it’s also indisputable that it was totally political since she ran on getting Trump for . . . something. Liable or not (and I suspect that judgment will be radically reduced), it was political and if she hadn’t been looking to mail him for something, anything, this case wouldn’t have happened. On top of that, this arguably helps Trump politically. The criminal trials are what matter and this is a political sideshow.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I'm not a lawyer - so I'll let the lawyers weigh in

View embedded media

She has immunity. So does judge Engoron. So does the state of New York.

Trump was targeted, the state took a shot, and it hit home. Never mind the fact that this case, the hush money case, the J6 case in DC, and the Georgia election case are all based on unprecedented applications of various statutes, there is nothing a target can do, except be a target.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Both sides claimed the evidence was clearcut and undisputed. No matter what James said about Trump, the ruling depends on evidence. Nothing she said changes that.

James represents the plaintiff and presented an unprecedented case. Unprecedented means this is the first. Thousands of loans are made upon financial statements, almost all of which, like this one, were paid according to their terms. Quit trying to pretend this is another Teapot Dome fraud.

 

[UncleMark]

Trump was targeted, the state took a shot, and it hit home. Never mind the fact that this case, the hush money case, the J6 case in DC, and the Georgia election case are all based on unprecedented applications of various statutes, there is nothing a target can do, except be a target.

Unprecedented behavior calls for an unprecedented response. Sometimes all you can do is work with the tools you've got.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Unprecedented behavior calls for an unprecedented response. Sometimes all you can do is work with the tools you've got.

Horseshit!!

There is nothing unprecedented about Trumps behavior in this loan transaction.

You just said the quiet part out loud. James abused the judicial system to get Trump for unrelated conduct.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I'm not threatened by anything Trump says. I consider that just clownish rantings of a blustering blowhard and coward with diminishing mental capacity and mental issues. He's not scary at all.

You said things were going to get ugly. That sounds like a vague threat to someone (not me) and I wonder what you mean by it.

Under the influence of alcohol, Joe has in the past explained those threats in detail. They involve a lot of killing. A great example of why Ranger was wrong to accuse the libs of being more dangerous.

 

[jet812]

Horseshit!!

There is nothing unprecedented about Trumps behavior in this loan transaction.

You just said the quiet part out loud. James abused the judicial system to get Trump for unrelated conduct.

Mark is on record multiple time with his “by any means necessary” need to get Trump. He will support ANY action they take against Trump, just or not, & he’s not alone…stay tuned.

 

[UncleMark]

Mark is on record multiple time with his “by any means necessary” need to get Trump. He will support ANY action they take against Trump, just or not, & he’s not alone…stay tuned.

I believe I've qualified that by saying "legal means necessary". If not, it should have been understood. But otherwise, hell yeah.

 

[UncleMark]

There is nothing unprecedented about Trumps behavior in this loan transaction.

Perhaps you're right about that. Now lets talk about J6, GA election, and concealing purloined classified documents.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Mark is on record multiple time with his “by any means necessary” need to get Trump. He will support ANY action they take against Trump, just or not, & he’s not alone…stay tuned.

He is by no means alone. There is no way Trump will be president in 2025. You can take that to the bank.

 

[IU_Hickory]

Mark is on record multiple time with his “by any means necessary” need to get Trump. He will support ANY action they take against Trump, just or not, & he’s not alone…stay tuned.

No, trumpers are on record saying it doesn't matter what laws Trump breaks because he should be immune from everything

 

[cosmickid]

The fact that its NEVER been used like this, and thus NEVER with this level of judgement? Maybe those?

Do you understand the meaning of the terminology "reversal is inevitable" ? I never said that he doesn't have an appealable claim, I just doubt very much it will be reversed. There might be a slight reduction in the amount of the penalty, but reversing the decision is highly unlikely...

The statute is pretty clear, and I doubt NY appellate judges are going to be any more receptive to the claims put forth by Trump and some on this board that there were no victims. Trump already launched an appeal over the staute of limitations, so the case has been discussed at the appellate level.

They basically just told Engoron to cull anyone who wasn't within the staute of limitations, which is why Ivanka was excluded. But they gave no indication that they had any problem with the case/statute.

 

[Stuffshot]

James represents the plaintiff and presented an unprecedented case. Unprecedented means this is the first. Thousands of loans are made upon financial statements, almost all of which, like this one, were paid according to their terms. Quit trying to pretend this is another Teapot Dome fraud.

I'm not pretending -- it was fraud according to the ruling. You never spent one second in that courtroom, so you don't know any different.

Bugliosi targeted Manson.
Giuliani targeted Gotti.
Ness targeted Capone.
And on and on.

Government lawyers target all the time. This is nothing new except that, this time, it's Trump and you like Trump.

 

[Stuffshot]

You just can’t help yourself. I said he may well be liable per NY law, but it’s also indisputable that it was totally political since she ran on getting Trump for . . . something. Liable or not (and I suspect that judgment will be radically reduced), it was political and if she hadn’t been looking to mail him for something, anything, this case wouldn’t have happened. On top of that, this arguably helps Trump politically. The criminal trials are what matter and this is a political sideshow.

I agree the government documents case and the two election fraud cases are more significant if that's what you mean, but the real estate values case should not be diminished just because Trump calls it "political." It's a huge case and representative of his entire way of doing business, much like the Trump University case.

"Political" doesn't mean much either, because Trump says he's going to pardon himself if reelected. -- that alone makes every single one of his cases "political."

The Stormy Daniels and Jean Carroll cases are in their own category.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

I agree the government documents case and the two election fraud cases are more significant if that's what you mean, but the real estate values case should not be diminished just because Trump calls it "political." It's a huge case and representative of his entire way of doing business, much like the Trump University case.

"Political" doesn't mean much either, because Trump says he's going to pardon himself if reelected. -- that alone makes every single one of his cases "political."

The Stormy Daniels and Jean Carroll cases are in their own category.

This case is clearly political because James ran on the promise to get Trump for some undefined something. If she wasn’t doing that it would be different. She did and it can’t be ignored. You should be able to acknowledge this fact.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Do you understand the meaning of the terminology "reversal is inevitable" ? I never said that he doesn't have an appealable claim, I just doubt very much it will be reversed. There might be a slight reduction in the amount of the penalty, but reversing the decision is highly unlikely...

The statute is pretty clear, and I doubt NY appellate judges are going to be any more receptive to the claims put forth by Trump and some on this board that there were no victims. Trump already launched an appeal over the staute of limitations, so the case has been discussed at the appellate level.

They basically just told Engoron to cull anyone who wasn't within the staute of limitations, which is why Ivanka was excluded. But they gave no indication that they had any problem with the case/statute.

James abused the legal system to get Trump. This action had nothing to do with protecting banks or consumers from fraud. It’s only about Trump running for office.

The hurts all of the judicial system.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I'm not pretending -- it was fraud according to the ruling. You never spent one second in that courtroom, so you don't know any different.

Bugliosi targeted Manson.
Giuliani targeted Gotti.
Ness targeted Capone.
And on and on.

Government lawyers target all the time. This is nothing new except that, this time, it's Trump and you like Trump.

So what? This was a civil case. James busted her butt to find a crime and couldn’t because there wasn’t any.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

This case is clearly political because James ran on the promise to get Trump for some undefined something. If she wasn’t doing that it would be different. She did and it can’t be ignored. You should be able to acknowledge this fact.

There is no way you can objectively call this case anything but a political prosecution.

 

[Hoopsdoc1978]

I'm not pretending -- it was fraud according to the ruling. You never spent one second in that courtroom, so you don't know any different.

Bugliosi targeted Manson.
Giuliani targeted Gotti.
Ness targeted Capone.
And on and on.

Government lawyers target all the time. This is nothing new except that, this time, it's Trump and you like Trump.

Manson, Gotti, and Capone murdered people.

The only thing Trump has murdered is your ability to reason.

TDS is real.

 

[UncleMark]

There is no way you can objectively call this case anything but a political prosecution.

Does that make it illegitimate?

 

[mcmurtry66]

Does that make it illegitimate?

The state’s top prosecutor should not be influenced by politics. She made it part of her campaign. She should be removed from office

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Does that make it illegitimate?

Absolutely.

 

[Baller23Boogie]

The state’s top prosecutor should not be influenced by politics. She made it part of her campaign. She should be removed from office

So, if she made it part of her campaign and was voted in, why would she be removed from office for following up on said promises?

 

[IU_Hickory]

The state’s top prosecutor should not be influenced by politics. She made it part of her campaign. She should be removed from office

Well obviously people wanted the prosecutor to go after Trump. Hence, they voted for her. Sounds like the system is working pretty well since she kept her promise. That should be bonus points rather than something to get fired over.

If Trump wasn't guilty, then he would have been found innocent in court. The prosecutor being partisan is immaterial to a fair trial.

 

[mcmurtry66]

So, if she made it part of her campaign and was voted in, why would she be removed from office for following up on said promises?

@IU_Hickory bc prosecutors are forbidden from allowing politics to influence their discretion

 

[IU_Hickory]

There is no way you can objectively call this case anything but a political prosecution.

The only thing you can say is the prosecutor took on the case for political reasons....

So what?

The judge and/or jury are who gets to decide cases. Prosecutors are never on the side of the defense so your complaint is immaterial to a fair trial.

And when Trump gets found guilty, it validates that the case was legit. And going after criminals IS NEVER A BAD THING regardless of party.

 

[Baller23Boogie]

@IU_Hickory bc prosecutors are forbidden from allowing politics to influence their discretion

If she knew he was doing something against the law and wanted to do something about it, is that wrong?

Or is it just because he's a republican and she's a Democrat that she can't go after him?

If that's the case, he'd never get brought charges because all he'd ever say is its a witch hunt by the dems to get him.

I remember when there was a time when knowingly breaking the law was looked down on and going after said defendant wasn't a bad thing.

 

[mcmurtry66]

If she knew he was doing something against the law and wanted to do something about it, is that wrong?

Or is it just because he's a republican and she's a Democrat that she can't go after him?

If that's the case, he'd never get brought charges because all he'd ever say is its a witch hunt by the dems to get him.

I remember when there was a time when knowingly breaking the law was looked down on and going after said defendant wasn't a bad thing.

No she campaigned saying that she will go through everything that man has done until she finds something. Paraphrasing. It was linked. That’s not okay

Party is immaterial. Politics impacts her discretion

 

[mcmurtry66]

Well obviously people wanted the prosecutor to go after Trump. Hence, they voted for her. Sounds like the system is working pretty well since she kept her promise. That should be bonus points rather than something to get fired over.

If Trump wasn't guilty, then he would have been found innocent in court. The prosecutor being partisan is immaterial to a fair trial.

I’m not debating this. I’m telling you. What the people want makes it worse. ABA sets it out

 

[CO. Hoosier]

If that's the case, he'd never get brought charges because all he'd ever say is its a witch hunt by the dems to get him.

Hochul and James admit to politics. James even brags about it.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The only thing you can say is the prosecutor took on the case for political reasons....

So what?

The judge and/or jury are who gets to decide cases. Prosecutors are never on the side of the defense so your complaint is immaterial to a fair trial.

And when Trump gets found guilty, it validates that the case was legit. And going after criminals IS NEVER A BAD THING regardless of party.

It’s unethical and James should be disciplined. What the public wants is irrelevant. Higher standards are at play. James assaulted lady justice.

Model ABA rule. States have adopted this or something similar.

The prosecutor should not manifest or exercise, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority.​

 

[CO. Hoosier]

And when Trump gets found guilty, it validates that the case was legit. And going after criminals IS NEVER A BAD THING regardless of party.

This was not a criminal case. There was no trial. The state of New York asked for the court to find a violation without a trial and Engoron obliged.

 

[BradStevens]

This was not a criminal case. There was no trial. The state of New York asked for the court to find a violation without a trial and Engoron obliged.

Didn't they have a bench trial?

 

[IU_Hickory]

I’m not debating this. I’m telling you. What the people want makes it worse. ABA sets it out

lol, thanks for "telling" me your opinion.

what people want didn't change the JUDGE's decision.

 

[mcmurtry66]

lol, thanks for "telling" me your opinion.

what people want didn't change the JUDGE's decision.

No some of us actually know things.

 

[IU_Hickory]

This was not a criminal case. There was no trial. The state of New York asked for the court to find a violation without a trial and Engoron obliged.

Engoron was the judge who presided over the case. You guys are complaining about the prosecutor. Not the same person.

Your partisan blinders would never accept any finding against Trump.

 

[IU_Hickory]

It’s unethical and James should be disciplined. What the public wants is irrelevant. Higher standards are at play. James assaulted lady justice.

Model ABA rule. States have adopted this or something similar.

The prosecutor should not manifest or exercise, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, or socioeconomic status. A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority.​

So Trump didn't break the law?

Oh wait, he did.

And prosecutors use their discretion on who to go after all of the time. Just because Trump is a republican doesn't mean being a republican is the reason she went after him. Your argument means every politician is granted immunity. Careful what you wish for.

Does that mean as a democrat, I don't have to worry about any republican prosecutors going after me? I'll just cry about it being a partisan witch hunt You have my back?