Trump ordered to pay nearly 355 million in NY fraud case.

[GardenLady]

Who were the victims? Who claimed to have been wronged?

Completely bogus argument. Fraud is fraud even if nobody is harmed. Fraud is fraud even if it doesn’t work. Just like driving drunk is illegal even if you don’t injure someone.

In this case, Trump realized “ill-gotten gains” in the form of loan and insurance rates that he was not entitled to but got because of fraud. Read the detailed info in the judgement. Those ill-gotten gains are the basis of the fine amount.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Completely bogus argument. Fraud is fraud even if nobody is harmed. Fraud is fraud even if it doesn’t work. Just like driving drunk is illegal even if you don’t injure someone.

In this case, Trump realized “ill-gotten gains” in the form of loan and insurance rates that he was not entitled to but got because of fraud. Read the detailed info in the judgement. Those ill-gotten gains are the basis of the fine amount.

Exactly. And the proper legal term is "disgorgement":
"

disgorgement​

​

Disgorgement is a remedy requiring a party who profits from illegal or wrongful acts to give up any profits they made as a result of that illegal or wrongful conduct. The purpose of this remedy is to prevent unjust enrichment and make illegal conduct unprofitable."

disgorgement

www.law.cornell.edu

In other words, Trump is not even being fined. He is being forced to return what was not rightfully his in the first place.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

At equity the doctrine of clean hands prevents the state from being the artiber of a dispute between itself and the person of Donald Trump, since there is no agent of the state who can arbitrate without the prejudice that arises from their security relationship with the state, which itself is a political construct and has no king from which it can draw an ethical basis. Election of a judicial agent by a majority who have political prejudice is no solution to the problem posed by the application of the doctrine of clean hands.

Yeah, the thing is, the US and NY don't acknowledge that as law. You might as well demand we must summon the witan for all political decisions and claim the Articles of Confrontation are binding.

 

[Laniakea]

Being able to support one's claims does give one a bit of leeway. I am not so demanding usually of @We Never Know because even though we disagree most of the time he will quite often support his claims. You do not do so.


Also, you are the one that wants to know how you screwed up. Wrong and rude is a toxic combination. You can be wrong and polite and people will debate with you all day long.

Oh my! Are you serious? I already demonstrated many times how I was correct in my assertion. Would you like me to show you again?

 

[Callisto]

Any you think that your denial is of value to anyone? Can you say "hypocrite"?

Perhaps you might be able to say it but clearly don't know what it means since I've not denied anything.

 

[Callisto]

There is another option that he could probably accomplish. He could pay what he can now. And work out a plan with the judge that he agreed to to oversee how his company spends money in New York and make a plan to pay his debts so he does not have to sell at fire sale prices.


I am sure that he will see that is the reasonable and honorable thing to do

Since he intends to appeal, if he can't put up the full amount then he can post a bond (smaller amount) plus collateral. So IF he could get a loan (*cough-Russia-cough*), he could use properties without having to sell.

Whether he pays in full or in bond, interest will accrue while he waits on the appeal (that will be at least another year) and reports have estimated that will be another $99 million he owes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh my! Are you serious? I already demonstrated many times how I was correct in my assertion. Would you like me to show you again?

No, you did not. Not once. You only made more claims. You did not even use reasoning. That is why your failure is so comical.

You also do not seem to understand that to demonstrate that you are right you need reliable sources and quotes.

When @Ebionite made ridiculous claims about courts being common law or admiralty courts I corrected him. When he foolishly claimed that I would not be able to support my claims I immediately posted a video that involved a sovereign citizen in court that was corrected, quite strongly, by a judge when he tried to make the same claims that @Ebionite did. He of course refused to watch the video and then falsely claimed that I did not support my claim even after I explained to him that the judge in that video made it clear that criminal courts are statutory courts.


Now I am not going to claim this because @Ebionite denies it, but again and again he makes arguments that sounds just like a sovereign citizen. They talk about "admiralty courts". Outside of the Navy you are not going to see them. He talks about common law courts, and those exist only in three states and most of their cases are business against business cases. He does not think that the state can be a victim (and that is key to sov cit beliefs because most of them have suspended driving licenses and they are desperately looking for a way to drive. If the state cannot be a victim then speed limits cannot exist. I know, crazy reasoning. And it never works in court.

I won't call him a sovereign citizen, but he does use all of their arguments. Lately sovereign citizens have been denying being sov cits. They have added one more argument. That "sovereign citizen" is self contradicting. As if they were the first to discover that. And @Ebionite has used that argument as well.

Okay, sorry for the detour, but I thought that you might want to know what you are dealing with.

But I guess that you do not want to know your rather silly unjustified assumption.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Since he intends to appeal, if he can't put up the full amount then he can post a bond (smaller amount) plus collateral. So IF he could get a loan (*cough-Russia-cough*), he could use properties without having to sell.

Whether he pays in full or in bond, interest will accrue while he waits on the appeal (that will be at least another year) and reports have estimated that will be another $99 million he owes.

If he can find someone willing to take the risk. And then he better triple check the values of any properties that he holds as collateral. Trump is tricky.

Do you know how he lied about the value of Mar a Lago?

 

[Callisto]

If he can find someone willing to take the risk. And then he better triple check the values of any properties that he holds as collateral. Trump is tricky.

Do you know how he lied about the value of Mar a Lago?

Yes. But then, there isn't much he hasn't lied about. Would be quicker to count the times told the truth, you could count them in one hand that was missing fingers.

 

[Stevicus]

Truckers Vow to Cut Off Deliveries to NYC in Protest of Trump’s $355 Million Civil-Fraud Ruling | National Review

It’s expected Trump-supporting truckers will band together to protest the court order starting Monday.

www.nationalreview.com

A trucker and conservative social-media influencer, known as Chicago Ray on X, announced the move Friday night in a video that has garnered 6 million views and 56,000 likes at the time of this writing. In the viral clip, Ray claimed he and some of his colleagues who support Trump will stop delivering loads to New York City once the coming work week begins.

“I’ve been on the radio talking to drivers for about the past hour and I’ve talked to about ten drivers . . . and they’re going to start refusing loads to New York City starting on Monday,” he said in the video while driving his truck.

“Our bosses ain’t gonna care if we deny the loads — we’ll just go somewhere else.

Later in the video, Ray claimed 95 or 96 percent of American truckers support Trump over President Joe Biden, and said he would provide any updates on the protest’s details come Monday.

Notably, the former president reposted Ray’s video on his Truth Social account Saturday night. “Such an honor to have so many Great Patriots on the side of FREEDOM! Joe Biden’s Unfair and Dangerous Weaponization of Law Enforcement is a serious threat to Democracy. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” the post reads.

I wonder if that includes all five boroughs of NYC or just Manhattan.

I'm not sure that 95 or 96 percent of truckers support Trump.

I think the bosses probably would care if they denied the loads, although I've read that some truckers refuse NYC as a matter of course because they don't like navigating those city streets in a big rig.

Next thing you know, they'll start boycotting all salsa made in NYC.

 

[Revoltingest]

Completely bogus argument. Fraud is fraud even if nobody is harmed. Fraud is fraud even if it doesn’t work. Just like driving drunk is illegal even if you don’t injure someone.

In this case, Trump realized “ill-gotten gains” in the form of loan and insurance rates that he was not entitled to but got because of fraud. Read the detailed info in the judgement. Those ill-gotten gains are the basis of the fine amount.

And better loan terms, eg, lower interest rates.

 

[Revoltingest]

Truckers Vow to Cut Off Deliveries to NYC in Protest of Trump’s $355 Million Civil-Fraud Ruling | National Review

It’s expected Trump-supporting truckers will band together to protest the court order starting Monday.

www.nationalreview.com

I wonder if that includes all five boroughs of NYC or just Manhattan.

I'm not sure that 95 or 96 percent of truckers support Trump.

I think the bosses probably would care if they denied the loads, although I've read that some truckers refuse NYC as a matter of course because they don't like navigating those city streets in a big rig.

Next thing you know, they'll start boycotting all salsa made in NYC.

Truckers have already started boycotting Broadway shows.
Although if Smokey & The Bandit became a musical, they
might make an exception.

 

[Stevicus]

Truckers have already started boycotting Broadway shows.
Although if Smokey & The Bandit became a musical, they
might make an exception.

I'm sure there will be some truckers who will break ranks and deliver to NY. I don't buy that figure of "95 to 96%" of truckers are for Trump. No doubt many of them are, but not that many.

I guess they could make Smokey and The Bandit into a musical. Or maybe Convoy, which already started as a song anyway.

"Mercy sakes alive!"

 

[SkepticThinker]

Or, we could believe what the NY AG said while running for office--vowing to go after Trump, even though she had no specific charges against him. She had to come up with something: https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics...mp-2018-comments-running-office-cnntm-vpx.cnn

This was in response to, "But how would they know, unless they became suspicious and employed separate real estate valuers to check the numbers the Trump organisation gave them? It was systematic fraud over a period of ten years or more.

The fact is the numbers were false and that is not allowed in business."

Can you explain what your response has to do with the content of the post you're responding to? It looks like a deflection to me.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If it was known for decades, it would have been prosecuted decades ago, rather than waiting for the year he is ahead in the election polls.

Remember when Trump ran the first time and when asked why he hasn't released his tax returns like all previous Presidents have always done, he kept saying he's under audit? Well .....

 

[SkepticThinker]

If the government agencies can go after Trump, they can go after you as well.
Beware.

They do. All the time.
Trump is finally getting his comeuppance. The elites are always the last to fall, eh?

 

[Callisto]

If the government agencies can go after Trump, they can go after you as well.
Beware.

Yeah, that's crazy. They're acting as if no one's above the law. Wild stuff.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It's not wrong.


That's not the same thing as fraud. (He lied to get a reduced price for a service.)


No, the difference is that using counterfeit coupons only takes value from those who redeem them - there's no benefit that could outweigh the loss that they made on those transactions.

It's the very definition of fraud:

 

[SkepticThinker]

You don't get to define what the rule of law is.

The court does/did. Trump lost.

 

[Laniakea]

This was in response to, "But how would they know, unless they became suspicious and employed separate real estate valuers to check the numbers the Trump organisation gave them? It was systematic fraud over a period of ten years or more.

The fact is the numbers were false and that is not allowed in business."

Can you explain what your response has to do with the content of the post you're responding to? It looks like a deflection to me.

You may want to look up the definition of what a deflection is.