The 8th Amendment In The Bill Of Rights.

In simple terms, The Supreme Court can decide, if it chooses too, to say that the Bill of Rights is in place to protect all citizens against ALL government over reach, which includes all officers of a government, whether it be a small town policeman or a large city Attorney General.

You noticed that too.

Our Liberal Democrat friends are willing to toss the Bill of Rights in the garbage in order to see that Trump looses.

The 8th Amendment is there. It’s written in reasonably plain English. Originally Posted by Jackie S

I do agree much of the legal wrangles Trump finds himself in are politically motivated and some are downright ludicrous. There are also some valid questions about some of the things he has done that deserve to be put to legal tests. While I am certain the former President isn't the only high roller to fudge his asset value to get better interest rates and access to resources beyond his means there really is not much doubt that he did just that. Which constitutes fraud and considering that Trump himself argued when questioned that his numbers were UNDER valued we understand he simply does not give two fucks about being truthful or transparent.

One of the numbers reported in the judgement to represent the amount Trump specifically gained by misreporting his worth is approx $160 million dollars. So if the argument is that he did not actually do what he was charged with ok I get it but this 'no victim' bullshit is hilarious. Much of the other 'fine' is interest and such but when you pocket over $100 million that should be in someone else's pocket then it is only fair and just to ask for that to be paid back.

As of Friday, Mr. Trump has 30 days to put up a bond, so he can have the decision appealed.
His lawyer is working the press on the other case where a bond is due. soon She wants the bond reduced.


Mr. Trump is sweating, and has been incoherent in appearances this week. He called Israel the capital of Israel, among many other blunders and misstatements.

In simple terms, The Supreme Court can decide, if it chooses too, to say that the Bill of Rights is in place to protect all citizens against ALL government over reach, which includes all officers of a government, whether it be a small town policeman or a large city Attorney General. Originally Posted by Jackie S

That's an interesting point. I'm convinced that a fair minded judge or jury would consider the $455 million an excessive fine. But this was determined by a state court in New York. The New York Supreme Court not that long ago was, collectively, fair minded. They shut down the legislature from gerrymandering New York House seats worse than Maryland. But I believe the composition of the court has changed and now they're not as fair, on political issues at least.

So if the amount stands up on appeal through the New York Supreme Court, does the U.S. Supreme Court step in? I believe if a federal court had set the fine, it would. How inclined though are they going to be to overturn or modify a state or local court decision, versus a federal court decision.

I have no idea. Blackman is probably the only person here who does, and he appears to think there's a good chance the amount will be lowered, although by whom and on what basis we don't know.

I don't see the US Supreme Court getting involved. This is a state court matter and the NY Supreme Court will be where this ends. In order to get to the USSC they'd have to seek relief in the federal court in NY which I doubt would either grant a stay to prevent Trump from paying through and injunction or find the 8th amendment applicable to a money judgment, which is what this is rather than a fine.

He can try it but it'll never get to the US Supreme Court.

Couple points of thought.

Is the punitive damage excessive? Likely - although judge Engoron was pretty specific towards the reasoning in his 92 page dissertation and ruling.

Will it be overturned or reduced?

I actually think that it likely will stand, as from my understanding of New York law the remedy portion of this is limited, and certainly the finds being civil versus criminal do not fall under the 8th amendment as has been discussed in the prior posts. If that stands as only relating to criminal cases, Donald may find himself in a quandary. He could decide on how to leverage that is being persecution, versus prosecution - we know the mag is like the red meat so they likely would rally - although not to the full tune of 400 million plus.

And lastly the reason behind the concern for Trump is that he wants to stay in business and out of jail.

He has everything to lose here..not just money, but his (shitty) business and his freedom.

... The Judge's decision will be Overturned.

There was NO fraud. ... And no one was damaged by the transaction.
Rather simple points...

... Other than the Judge pissing on the Expert Witness.
So that fellow may seek damages...
As will the Bank - as their valuation methods have been
called into question.
... And, of course, the Trump Organization will be seeking damages.
Punitive ones.

#### Salty

To refresh your memory, I accepted the challenge of the aforementioned board members to actually read Kangaroo Engoron's decision. For your review, here's Part 1 of my analysis:

https://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?p=1063433291

I left off in the middle of descriptions of testimony of some of the witnesses, and now shall proceed with the testimony of Michiel McCarty, expert witness for the State of New York on banking and capital markets. Judge Engoron determined the amounts of fines that Trump would have to pay based on McCarty's work.

McCarty determined what amount in interest Trump entities actually paid under the terms of loans for which Donald Trump provided a personal guarantee. And then repeated the exercise assuming the loans had no personal guarantees.

This was a simple exercise for most of the loan value used by Kangaroo Engoron to assess fines against Trump, because Deutsche Bank had already done the work for him. One division of Deutsche Bank, the Private Wealth Management division, priced and made loans to Trump, secured by specific properties. but these loans also required Trump's personal guarantee. In other words, if the loans went bad, the bank could go after not just the collateral, but also all of Trump's other unsecured assets.

And Deutsche Bank's Commercial Real Estate Division priced loans secured by the same properties, but without Trump's personal guarantee.

Mr. McCarty's work appears reasonable to me. The problem is the way Kangaroo Engoron used McCarty's work to assess fines.

To be continued, shortly

Engoron awarded $355 million to the state of New York, along with 9% per annum interest on the $355 million, or about $455 million to present. And the interest is increasing the amount owed by $112,000 every day.

So how did the judge come up with $355 million, all of which, plus interest, will go to the state of New York? Well, from Engoron’s decision (page 82) it’s disgorgement of the “defendant’s ill-gotten gains. Disgorgement is the equitable remedy that deprives wrongdoers of their net profits from unlawful activity.”

The first component is $168 million, based on the “personal guarantee interest rate differential.” The paid expert witness for the State of New York, Michiel McCarty (see Part 2), said that Trump saved $168 million in interest expense because Trump personally guaranteed three loans that were also secured by the real estate:

1. The Doral golf club. Trump borrowed $130 million from Deutsche Bank. He agreed to maintain a minimum net worth of $2.5 billion as part of his personal guarantee.

2. Trump International Hotel & Tower, Chicago, a mixed residential/commercial development. Trump obtained a credit facility of up to $62 million using unsold condos as collateral, and a second facility of up to $45 million, using commercial property as collateral. This loan was also conditioned upon a personal guarantee, and from reporting in the press, Trump was required to maintain a minimum net worth of $2.5 billion

3. The Old Post Office Loan, for Trump’s hotel in Washington, D.C. Engoron does not report the amount of the loan in his decision, but according to reporting from Forbes in 2020, it was an estimated $170 million. This loan also was from Deutsche Bank. Trump agreed to a personal guarantee, and to maintain a minimum net worth of $2.5 billion.

Please note the loans above add up to $397 million, assuming the credit facilities were at some point fully drawn. The $168 million fine is 42% of the total amount Deutsche Bank loaned Trump!

Will a borrower pay a lower interest rate with a personal guarantee than without one? Yes, of course. But Deutsche Bank got a personal guarantee. Engoron’s claiming that personal guarantee was worth nothing, and that the fine should be set accordingly. That’s bull shit. Deutsche Bank was well aware of Trump’s history as a problematic creditor, having even been burned by a loan on the Trump Chicago property that predated the three loans above. The old loan was nonrecourse, meaning Trump did not personally guarantee it, so that DB could only come after the asset. They were burned once. They weren’t going to be burned twice.

So did Deutsche Bank believe Trump’s statements of financial condition (SFC’s)? I can’t imagine how they possibly could have, given common knowledge that Trump, John Barron, et al exaggerates his net worth.

From reporting in the press (see post 31 in this thread), after examining Trump’s Statements of Financial Condition, Deutsche Bank took Trump’s claimed net worth of $4.3 billion in 2011 and $5.8 billion in 2019, and marked it down to a minimum level of $2.4 billion to $2.5 billion. The bank was prepared to take the risk that Trump was worth a lot less than the amounts claimed in the SFC’s.

The rest of the story will have to wait, because I’ve run out of time. Kangaroo Engoron’s reasoning in setting the amount of the fine only gets more bizarre from here. Stay tuned for the next chapter.

I'm glad you read it. Now he's found himself unable to pay.

In Part 3, I established Kangaroo Engoron's ludicrous reasoning for $168 million of his total $455 million in fines and interest. As promised, the story becomes even more ridiculous.

Trump made a profit of $126.8 million by purchasing a hotel in Washington D.C. and then reselling it, the "Old Post Office" property described in Part 3. Engoron makes the absurd assumption that Trump would have never gotten the loan to buy the building if not for falsifying his statement of financial condition. Therefore he must disgorge the entire $126.8 million profit.

He uses similar, fallacious reasoning to require Trump to disgorge $60 million from sale of the Ferry Point property.

So, we're now at $355 million in fines, to be paid not to the banks that allegedly were defrauded, but rather to the State of New York.

The remaining $100 million is interest, calculated from March 4, 2019, the date the Attorney General commenced its investigation. So Trump's paying interest on his loans from the banks, plus a bogus surcharge in the form of a fine imposed by Engoron, plus 9% interest on top of the other interest from 2019.

Incredible! No wonder Trump supporters are buying Bibles, contributing to Trump PAC's, and buying Trump Media stock.

And now we see that he bond has been reduced by nearly 60%.

On to the appeal.

And now we see that he bond has been reduced by nearly 60%. Originally Posted by ICU 812

As it should have been. That was a good call on the part of the New York appellate judges, all of whom were appointed by Democratic governors.

I could not care less about either the NY case or the Stormy Daniel's case. Even if the judgement holds in NY or Trump is found guilty in the Daniel's case, the decisions will do little to hurt Trump in November in my opinion.

I am looking beyond those 2 court cases to the other 3, where if Trump is found guilty on the charges made there the impact to the election will be huge. Trump is doing everthing possible to delay the trials beyond election day for obvious reasons -- he will be found guilty on at least some of the charges.

I could not care less about either the NY case or the Stormy Daniel's case. Even if the judgement holds in NY or Trump is found guilty in the Daniel's case, the decisions will do little to hurt Trump in November in my opinion.

I am looking beyond those 2 court cases to the other 3, where if Trump is found guilty on the charges made there the impact to the election will be huge. Trump is doing everthing possible to delay the trials beyond election day for obvious reasons -- he will be found guilty on at least some of the charges. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Well of course they aren't going to go this far without burning him on something. There has been an obvious pattern set over the past several years. It may not hurt Trump as much as you think. Human nature is a weird thing. People often root for the under dog.