If You Overvalued Your Assets You Can't Be Mad When No One Will Give You Money Against Them

Another demonstration about how little you know about the law.
Barely listened? That's because the damages came from ill gotten gains. Just because you don't understand how this works means you don't understand it.
How is Jon Steward selling his property for a very nice profit illegal? What fraud did he commit? Who did he overvalue his home to and for what reason? Can't wait for this answer.

You and yours don't even understand how the judge made his ruling.
Look how trumpys have done in court. No serious legal challenge has been made about the case other than the amount of the damages (ill gotten gains).

No way verdict will be overturned. You refuse to read the ruling. It explains the charges.
And claiming Jon Stewart committed fraud is just trumpys being trumpys. Like election denial.

... And at the "damages" hearing - Judge Engoron barely listened
to the testimony from the banks. Who claimed that Trump did not
do anything differently then most property clients - and all
the monnies were payed back... And even stated that they'd
certainly look forward to business with Mr. Trump again.

THAT surely shows the bias the Judge has AGAINST Trump.
So much for fairness under the Law...

And Letitia James? ... She has said that she's treating Trump
no different than anybody else... So IF that is the truth,
she'll be bringing charges against Jon Stewart next week.

Since Mr. Stewart surely OVERVALUED his-own home.
Greatly overvalued it...

Now we'll see if AG Letitia is "all talk and no cock", so to speak...

#### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again

Another demonstration about how little you know about the law.
Barely listened? That's because the damages came from ill gotten gains. Just because you don't understand how this works means you don't understand it.
How is Jon Steward selling his property for a very nice profit illegal? What fraud did he commit? Who did he overvalue his home to and for what reason? Can't wait for this answer.

You and yours don't even understand how the judge made his ruling.
Look how trumpys have done in court. No serious legal challenge has been made about the case other than the amount of the damages (ill gotten gains).

No way verdict will be overturned. You refuse to read the ruling. It explains the charges.
And claiming Jon Stewart committed fraud is just trumpys being trumpys. Like election denial. Originally Posted by Tigbitties38

So you think every time someone makes misrepresentations on his financial statement, gets a mortgage, and then later sells his house for a profit, he should disgorge the profit to the State of New York? And pay interest to the State of New York on the profit? Even though the bank received all interest and principal payments on time? And even though the bank KNEW the borrower misrepresented his financial condition? Because that accounts for the majority of the $455 million fine imposed by Judge Engoron. The logic Engoron used to justify the remainder of the fine, besides disgorgement of profits on sales, is just as laughable.

I find it funny you claim your definition of fraud is correct and the state's isn't.
Then you use the mobile case as proof this case isn't fraud.
The court has ruled on both cases. The court, so far, has ruled one case was fraud and one wasn't.
Are you familiar with the concept of ill gotten gains? That's the damages. If you made money through fraudulent means, the money you made is the damaged. Can't explain it any simpler than that. The banks weren't damaged.
Who claimed they were? Trump made money using fraudulent means. He has to return his ill gotten gains. Plus interest.

Read the judge's ruling. It answers all the pertinent questions. The ruling isn't being challenged, just the amounts of the fines.

I find it funny you claim your definition of fraud is correct and the state's isn't.
Then you use the mobile case as proof this case isn't fraud.
The court has ruled on both cases. The court, so far, has ruled one case was fraud and one wasn't.
Are you familiar with the concept of ill gotten gains? That's the damages. If you made money through fraudulent means, the money you made is the damaged. Can't explain it any simpler than that. The banks weren't damaged.
Who claimed they were? Trump made money using fraudulent means. He has to return his ill gotten gains. Plus interest

Read the judge's ruling. It answers all the pertinent questions. The ruling isn't being challenged, just the amounts of the fines. Originally Posted by Tigbitties38

I did read the judge's ruling. The judge is full of shit. See my four part series in Jackie's 8th Amendment Thread, "The Vitaman/Blackman/Yeahsurewhatever Challenge."

Do I believe the fine will be overturned on appeal? No. Do I believe it will be reduced, a lot? Yes, even though the appellate and Supreme Court judges in New York are Democrats or appointed by Democrat governors.

And yes, given the definition of fraud in New York Executive Law 63(12), Trump and all of us have committed fraud. My argument was that the people of New York were not defrauded when Trump made misrepresentations to his banks.

Why do you believe Trump should pay the alleged "ill gotten gains" to the State of New York instead of the banks?

I didn't say that. But we have a record of what you've said. Even more laughable is you thinking trump should get to keep his ill gotten gains. You don't like New York's laws? Tough. The law is the law. Why do you think it okay to break it because you don't like it? This wasn't just a mistake.
Again, ten years of fraud. 10 years of knowingly breaking the law for personal gain.
Do we have to point out trump has been doing this much longer? 10 years is the time limit
I will say that if this case is appealed, the judge's ruling is what the appeal court will see and consider. They won't see the nonsense written by someone who couldn't be bothered to read the judge's ruling. Is the court going to consider your example? Fuck no.
You say the fine is excessive. Ten years of fraud is involved here and every dollar in fines is explained.
I've read the ruling and you don't need to be an attorney to see the difference between the ruling and your claims. You offer up a single example as comparable to ten years and many intentional fraudulent acts.
My opinion is that there isn't any reason to believe your non-professional opinion over a supreme court justice.
And as long as you ignore the information the court of appeals will use to decide the appeal, your uninformed opinion is just that. Get back to me when you've read the ruling.
Hopefully you'll stop whining about the legality and validity of the trial.
But I know your hubris will keep you claiming the banks weren't hurt so there is no fraud. Read what the ruling says about ill gotten gains.
Now you know what I think. You don't have to guess any more.

So you think every time someone makes misrepresentations on his financial statement, gets a mortgage, and then later sells his house for a profit, he should disgorge the profit to the State of New York? And pay interest to the State of New York on the profit? Even though the bank received all interest and principal payments on time? And even though the bank KNEW the borrower misrepresented his financial condition? Because that accounts for the majority of the $455 million fine imposed by Judge Engoron. The logic Engoron used to justify the remainder of the fine, besides disgorgement of profits on sales, is just as laughable. Originally Posted by Tiny

My opinion is that there isn't any reason to believe your non-professional opinion over a supreme court justice.
And as long as you ignore the information the court of appeals will use to decide the appeal, your uninformed opinion is just that. Get back to me when you've read the ruling. Originally Posted by Tigbitties38

1. The Supreme Court of New York hasn't examined this.

2. The Appellate judges have and they chose to overrule Engoron when he jerked Trump's licenses to do business in New York. And to reduce Trump's bond. So I suspect there is a lot of sentiment that Engoron overstepped.

3. I read the ruling, all of it. Again, please see my four part analysis in Jackie's 8th Amendment thread. It explains step-by-step why Kangaroo Engoron's basis for setting a $455 million fine is ridiculous. I go through every property that Engoron used as a basis for the fine.

4. No one here except Blackman is in a position to refute most of what I've written, because no one else here has studied the ruling AND followed the case as closely as I have. Blackman very possibly could decimate my arguments. But thankfully he decided to take a vacation. You could try PM'ing him to try to get him back. Until then, the mice shall play. Or this mouse will anyway. Alternately, you could spend about 10 hours studying press reports, the decision, the law, and other cases prosecuted under 63(12), in which case you'd agree with me on many points if you're fair-minded.