Trump's bond reduced to 175 million

[Laniakea]

Not really. No TDS necessary. Just an observation of reality and a comparison of how Trump has been treated in the courts, versus how a regular person is treated in the courts, demonstrates that Trump (and the elite in general) often receive preferential treatment over the Average Joe. This is just another example.

If you believe being railroaded by activist liberal judges is preferential treatment, then why should we listen to liberals who like to say "No one is above the law" as if that means everyone else is treated even worse than that? Don't you believe in law and order after all?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe everyone should be able to appeal a court's decision, and that it not be overly burdensome to do so.

And you think it's "overly burdensome" for a thief to have to turn in their ill-gotten gains in order to get an appeal? Why?

 

[Laniakea]

And you think it's "overly burdensome" for a thief to have to turn in their ill-gotten gains in order to get an appeal? Why?

Now you're implying that someone has to plead guilty to appeal a guilty verdict because they maintain their innocence.
This isn't Orwell's 1984, no matter how badly you wish it was.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now you're implying that someone has to plead guilty to appeal a guilty verdict because they maintain their innocence.
This isn't Orwell's 1984, no matter how badly you wish it was.

The standards for a civil trial are not the same as for a criminal one. You are conflating the two.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe everyone should be able to appeal a court's decision, and that it not be overly burdensome to do so.

Well for once @9-10ths_Penguin was not quite right. This was not a criminal trial. It was a civil trial. And remember, there was no fine. He only had to return ill gotten gains. Money that was not his in the first case. Tell me, what do you think are Trump's grounds for appeal. Remember, he wants to win this case.

 

[Laniakea]

Well for once @9-10ths_Penguin was not quite right. This was not a criminal trial. It was a civil trial. And remember, there was no fine. He only had to return ill gotten gains. Money that was not his in the first case. Tell me, what do you think are Trump's grounds for appeal. Remember, he wants to win this case.

The fact that those who were said to be defrauded testified that they were not defrauded.
But Latoya Lames had a campaign promise to keep.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The fact that those who were said to be defrauded testified that they were not defrauded.
But Latoya Lames had a campaign promise to keep.

You keep getting who the victims were wrong. You have been corrected often enough on this so since you used an old failed argument I will take this as an admission that you are wrong.

 

[Laniakea]

You keep getting who the victims were wrong. You have been corrected often enough on this so since you used an old failed argument I will take this as an admission that you are wrong.

The AP seems to require your "expert knowledge".

"Judge Arthur Engoron, ruling in a civil lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, found that Trump and his company deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth on paperwork used in making deals and securing loans." Judge rules Donald Trump defrauded banks and insurers while building real estate empire.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The AP seems to require your "expert knowledge".

"Judge Arthur Engoron, ruling in a civil lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, found that Trump and his company deceived banks, insurers and others by massively overvaluing his assets and exaggerating his net worth on paperwork used in making deals and securing loans." Judge rules Donald Trump defrauded banks and insurers while building real estate empire.

Yes, he put them at a greater risk. So there is that. But you ignored how your defense of your claim about banks was refuted.

 

[Laniakea]

Yes, he put them at a greater risk. So there is that. But you ignored how your defense of your claim about banks was refuted.

That's because my claim was not refuted in a way that is supported by facts and evidence, and thus does not deserve whatever amount of attention you seem to believe is warranted.
Therefore, my claim is uncontested.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's because my claim was not refuted in a way that is supported by facts and evidence, and thus does not deserve whatever amount of attention you seem to believe is warranted.
Therefore, my claim is uncontested.

Wrong again. We are not going to get anywhere if your memory keeps failing.

 

[Laniakea]

Wrong again. We are not going to get anywhere if your memory keeps failing.

You are still making unsupported claims without evidence. As long as you do that, you have no claims that are worth addressing.
Your posting style and general behavior are another matter.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are still making unsupported claims without evidence. As long as you do that, you have no claims that are worth addressing.
Your posting style and general behavior are another matter.

No need for them for that sort of claim. The thread stands as evidence.

You are avoiding supporting your claims again. You keep forgetting that I did so multiple times for why the result of the trial was not a fine. I even gave you links to what you needed to show that the disgorgement was excessive. I am the one that has supported his claims and I am a bit tired of you endlessly running away.

 

[Laniakea]

No need for them for that sort of claim. The thread stands as evidence.

You are avoiding supporting your claims again. You keep forgetting that I did so multiple times for why the result of the trial was not a fine. I even gave you links to what you needed to show that the disgorgement was excessive. I am the one that has supported his claims and I am a bit tired of you endlessly running away.

But you can't help but continue to chase me.
What would you do if you managed to catch me?

 

[Subduction Zone]

But you can't help but continue to chase me.
What would you do if you managed to catch me?

Correct you. What would I do if I managed to get you to start to reason critically? Faint!

 

[Laniakea]

Correct you. What would I do if I managed to get you to start to reason critically? Faint!

I love a man who makes me laugh!

 

[fantome profane]

I figure it's only a ballpark figure of 437,500 sneakers to cover it.

um, is that 437,500 individual sneakers? Or 437,500 pairs of sneakers? Cuz that would actually be 875,000 big ugly stupid lookin shoes. (if I did the math correctly)

 

[SkepticThinker]

If I'm offended by it, then it is.

LOL No.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well for once @9-10ths_Penguin was not quite right. This was not a criminal trial. It was a civil trial.

It was a civil trial related to a criminal act.

I have no more issue calling Trump a fraudster than I do calling OJ Simpson a murderer.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If you believe being railroaded by activist liberal judges is preferential treatment, ...

That's a claim that requires evidence.

...then why should we listen to liberals who like to say "No one is above the law" as if that means everyone else is treated even worse than that? Don't you believe in law and order after all?

This was in response to, "Not really. No TDS necessary. Just an observation of reality and a comparison of how Trump has been treated in the courts, versus how a regular person is treated in the courts, demonstrates that Trump (and the elite in general) often receive preferential treatment over the Average Joe. This is just another example."

Notice how you didn't address the point about Trump and the preferential treatment he continues to receive in these cases.

Yes, I believe in law and order. Which is why I believe Trump needs to be held accountable for his myriad crimes and should be treated in the exact same manner as any other citizen who has been indicted.