Columns, Courts, Politics

“Nothing Succeeds Like Excess”: New York’s Perverse Incentive in Pricing Trump Out of an Appeal

Below is my column in the New York Post on the confiscatory fines imposed on former president Donald Trump and his family and corporation. Democrats are thrilled by the over the $450 million bill facing Trump and the possibility that he could be forced to sell off property just to seek an appeal. On ABC, New York Attorney General Letitia James declared “If he does not have funds to pay off the judgment, then we will seek judgment enforcement mechanisms in court, and we will ask the judge to seize his assets.” She added menacingly “yes, I look at 40 Wall Street each and every day.” It is a curious legal system where defendants can be priced out of appeals. While Trump has ample resources and can do this without a “fire sale,” it suggests that a person could be forced to sell a home to challenge its loss in court.

Here is the column:

Oscar Wilde wrote that “moderation is a fatal thing. Nothing succeeds like excess.” Justice Arthur Engoron took that line to heart with his absurd imposition of $455 million in fines and interest against Donald Trump and his corporation.

It succeeded wonderfully with New Yorkers, who celebrated the verdict like a popular public execution. It also worked wonderfully to make it difficult to appeal.

Much of the criticism of the decision focused on the unprecedented use of the law and the excessive size of the fine. The New York statute has been on the books for decades and has always been something of an anomaly in not requiring an actual victim or loss to justify disgorgement or fines.

Even the New York Times agreed that it could not find a single case in history where this statute was used against an individual or a company that did not commit a criminal offense, go bankrupt, or leave financial victims.

Engoron then combined that unprecedented application with an equally extraordinary penalty, which is greater than the gross national product of some countries.

He disgorged hundreds of millions in a case where not one dollar was lost by anyone. Indeed, the “victims” wanted to get more business from Trump and are now being prevented from doing so by Engoron.

There is also an added inequity to Engoron’s decision.

Under New York law, Trump cannot appeal this ruling without depositing the full amount, including interest, in a court account. Even for Trump, $455 million is hard to come by. Likewise, a bond would require a company to guarantee payment for a defendant who has been barred from doing business in New York and is facing the need to liquidate much of his portfolio.

Nothing succeeds like excess for judges like Engoron. By imposing this astronomical figure, he can make it difficult or impossible for a defendant to appeal, absent declaring bankruptcy or selling off assets at distress prices.

The excessive fine and its basis raise serious statutory and constitutional questions. Many of us believe it should be substantially reduced or tossed out entirely.

First, however, Trump must come up with almost half a billion dollars to park with the court. Even with a bond, the high costs of securing a guarantor could come at a premium. It would cost a fortune to the bond holder just to carry the risk even if Trump prevails on appeal.

The combination of the draconian fine and the threshold deposit for appeal has produced a shudder throughout the New York business community. The city is already experiencing an exodus of businesses and individuals from the top tax brackets. Rising crime, taxes, and eat-the-rich politics have made New York a hostile environment for businesses. At a time with rising costs from undocumented migrants, even Mayor Eric Adams is alarmed about the loss of his high earners.

The case brought by Attorney General Letitia James was unnerving for many. James previously sought to dissolve the National Rifle Association and campaigned on bagging Trump on some unnamed offense. The ecstasy expressed by many in the city reinforced the image of a thrill-kill chase around the island of Manhattan, like a corporate version of “Lord of the Flies.”

Watching the celebrations probably caused many executives to check time shares in Florida. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has rushed to assure businesses that there is “nothing to worry about” after the corporate public execution of Trump and his company.

But the best that politicians like Hochul and Adams can offer is that you have nothing to fear from confiscatory actions unless you are Trump in New York.

Which is precisely why this decision should be overturned.

What is clear is that this case would never have been brought, let alone result in this massive fine, except for politics.

For example, if you are the NRA, James will seek your destruction for financial irregularities, but if you are Black Lives Matter or Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, there is little real risk in such controversies.

If the only protection in New York is the discretion of figures like James, few businesses would relish the future. The message is that you can expect blind and equal justice so long as you don’t run afoul of the Democrats in power.

If you are unpopular, you could be looking at not only unprecedented actions and fines, but a need to virtually liquidate your assets just to be able to appeal a decision.

This should shock the conscience of anyone concerned about the integrity and fairness of the New York legal system. Confiscatory fines and required deposits leave not just defendants but the entire system bankrupt.

Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.

285 thoughts on ““Nothing Succeeds Like Excess”: New York’s Perverse Incentive in Pricing Trump Out of an Appeal”

  2. I’m going to put my little tusche out a limb this morning. (sorry in advance for lengthy post)
    I think that “equitable disgorgement” was intentionally used as remedy because the $$$$ amount of the alleged “ill-gotten” gains in a victimless matter:
    (1) would likely end up going from Trump’s “deep pockets” into financially-strapped NY state coffers.. and
    (2) the $$$$ amount of the alleged “ill-gotten” gains (in a victimless matter) IS SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER than what would have been permitted under a criminal misdemeanor victimless “penalty” subject to a “proportionality” finding.

    (It has been at least a decade since I had anything to do with disgorgement cases. Since that time, both Kokesh and Liu were decided by SCOTUS in the last decade, –But neither is directly on point. And although I apologized yesterday for referencing a wrong cited violation as not requiring reliance or intent (it does, in its language), I DO opine that AG James and Engoron were veddy veddy careful to fashion the case (albeit citing criminal misdemeanor violations) in such a manner as to be adjudicative as an equitable disgorgement of “ill-gotten” gains as remedy.
    Moreover, Engoron’s Order included additional sanctions, e.g., injunctive relief. Sanctions acting as ‘deterrent’ remedies for violation of public laws are not ‘”legitimate non-punitive governmental objectives.” Bell, 441 U.S. 520, 539, n.20)
    AND, notwithstanding Engoron’s questionable reliance on “certain” witnesses for calculations of “ill-gotten gains” as well as asset valuations, there was no allowance for reduction of expenses incurred by Trump.
    All of these factors point to the disgorgement as ipso facto criminal “penalty.” That means it may be subject to appellate reduction/remittitur using a “proportionality in sentencing” standard.
    hope I’m making sense this morning.

    1. Adding to your comment, none of the original parties bothered to claim, “Hey, wait? The State of New York now says we could and SHOULD have charged MORE interest after terms were agreed upon and the loans paid back? WTH?” So how is it that no one, other than The State, had a say in how much those interest rates SHOULD HAVE been? Under what authority, I mean. Prosecutor, Judge, anyone in the Justice department? How exactly does the state have the authority to review decades-past, fully-paid loan terms, between private parties, for the singular purpose to find any “penalty”, let alone apportionment of that penalty?

      1. Welcome to our 3rd world country and our socialist government. You can bet they’re thinking of who to screw next in NY so they can continue to be a sanctuary city and get illegals paid for by wealthy business people. That’s the DEM way, after all. Other people’s money. Just found another non-tax way to grab it. Were I Trump, after this settles I’d use whatever I have left to have the judge “erased.”

      2. Have you ever gotten a free sub from a sandwich shop because you eat there frequently?

        Same idea… repeat business, except in this case with someone who is the President of the United States and can ruin you with a tweet.

    2. I will not be too worry about him, if he is worth 10 billions, the fine is just about 4% producer of his worth. He will just be fine.

  3. May the United States of America be blessed with a revival in which our founding fathers’ ideals and values arise for the people of our constitutional republic.

  4. The need to post the full amount of the judgment didn’t initiate with Trump though I could see how it could be abused. Then again, Trump has abused the appeal process and delayed justice with ridiculous appeals with no chance of success like the one demanding absolute immunity. I’m in favor of extreme penalties for clients and lawyers who sumbit farcical appeals. I think Trump’s plan is to die of old age before serving a day or paying a penalty.

    1. Enigma, too bad you are not in support of “extreme penalties” for crimes that actually harm people. Your side watches ILLEGALS fight with cops and then doesn’t even hold them with bail. Your side is lenient towards the people that attack others on the subway and street, but not Trump.

      I am so sick of leftist fools destroying cities, attacking law abiding people that want to own a gun, blocking streets, attacking Jews, censoring opinion, threatening Justices, burning police stations and courthouses. Hey pal, go to Gaza with Tlaib. go to Somalia with Omar, go to Iran with Obama and Biden, go to China with Kerry and Bill Gates. Go somewhere else but stop destroying our cities with your leftist garbage.

  5. Committing financial fraud in real estate investment trusts in 2005 did not have a lot of obvious victims but by 2008 it had a lot of victims. Elizabeth Holmes made a lot of money for her company and a lot of people wanted to do business with her until her fraud was exposed.

    Trump had a lot of bankruptcies in earlier years. Not everyone gets paid all the time when fraud happens, but people can make money for a while.

        2. Bob, you ought to read the link you posted because the link shows you stupider then one would think before reading it.

  6. I seriously do not know how Trump trudges on. Love him or hate him, you have to admit that most people would never be able to withstand the pressure he is being put under and yet there he is- at his next rally. The man is like the energizer bunny and I would not predict one thing about this election, with this guy in the mix. I would have buckled years ago and pulled up my rocking chair on my front porch, ages ago.

    1. I totally agree, but this is precisely what this whole plot is about:

      Las demandas SLAPP/ley de intimidación son demandas destinadas a censurar, intimidar y silenciar a los críticos cargándolos con el costo de una defensa legal hasta que abandonen sus críticas u oposición. El objetivo es que el acusado sucumba al miedo, la intimidación, los crecientes costos legales o el agotamiento 🔴

  7. There are a number of conservative, public interest law firms, such as the Pacific Legal Foundation, who could challenge the law. But perhaps it’s better to let it stand, as it will serve as incentive for anyone involved in real estate investing, financing or development to get out of the NY market.

  8. In the meantime it’s reported that after 200 years Remington Arms is leaving NY and setting up business in Georgia. How many other businesses and investors will follow?

  9. Is there really a UNIVERSAL Get Out Of Jail For Free Card??

    Well, yes, there IS such a thing! But it is kept well hidden and is known about by only a very few though, due to various reasons. The main one, is the populace is kept ignorant, dumbed down, as some like to say, via the public fool system. No one is taught real history or how to think about things anymore. Virtually no one knows what logic is or how to use it. Nearly everyone is taught only the mantra of “go along to get along”. Another one is “Why tell the truth, when a lie will serve almost as well?”. As if truth is a rare commodity that must not ever be wasted on trivial things, being saved for only the most momentous of occasions!
    So, what things could possibly be written on this all powerful and totally universal card? There are many things, but all of them have one concept in common, all of them expose some kind of fraud that is going on in the legal system. This may not seem like such a big deal at first glance, but it IS a big deal! It’s because fraud is one of the major things that the legal system is supposed to stand in opposition to, but without committing copious amounts of fraud on a daily basis, the current legal system couldn’t exist at all! Whom of the Actors, Operators, Agents or Officers that run the privately owned legal system, would ever tell you that compliance with it is done strictly on a voluntary basis? It MUST be done on that basis, because it is a criminal enterprise, and no man or woman can be forced to join in any criminal activities! To get around that technicality, the legal system uses something called “implied consent”, which is no consent at all, since fraud is involved. Look up the definition of Consent in any law dictionary, and then see how it applies to the legal system. While you are at it, look up Contract, Fraud and Person too, and see how those definitions fit into the legal system.
    When one looks at the legal system as just a few snippets of it here and there, one at a time, it is difficult, if not impossible, to know what the entire picture looks like! But after looking at enough of those tiny little bits and pieces, recognizing how they overlap and interact with each other, remembering the importance of each one and its complexity and its location, the bigger picture can be seen to emerge from all of the chaos and confusion.
    Consider now the reversal of a land mark case called Roe v. Wade, in 2022. Back in 1973, the USSC/SCOTUS made a decision about the life or death of unborn babies. Then, 49 years later, a whole new panel of “judges” said that it was an egregious mistake that had been made, without ever bringing in any new evidence, witnesses or legal theories! How is that possible? One day the decision of 9 men was totally valid, as it had been for 49 years, and then suddenly, the next day, it was not! What almost no one noticed there, was that the USSC/SCOTUS announced to the whole wide world on that very same day, that it is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial when it comes to making sound and logical and correct legal decisions! If those men in what is considered to be the highest court in the land could not render a correct decision, then how can ANY court in the 100% corrupted legal system, make correct decisions at ANY time? Are we to wait around for 49 years to see if it was right or not?
    Another thing on this most magical of cards, is the demand for a copy of our written guarantee of actually getting a fair trial! If we do not have that guarantee, then every fake trial instantly transforms into one of two things; either it is a pure gamble with no outcome known beforehand, like in a coin toss, or, it is a well orchestrated scam being run on us, with an outcome that is known well in advance of the conclusion of the “trial”. There is no third option possible there, so take your pick of those. No man or woman can be forced to make bets or compelled to participate in any kind of a crime! If there is such a law, and it is a valid one, then where can it be found so all can read it and agree to it?
    We can add to that card The Seven Elements Of Jurisdiction, the Void For Vagueness Doctrine, Fraud upon the Court, the definitions of the words Contract and Fraud. And don’t forget that anything that is alleged to be a bona fide contract, is vacated for fraud, threat, duress, coercion, mistake, illegality, immorality, impossibility, insanity, unlawfulness or age of minority. Those things violate the five ESSENTIAL elements of a contract, and since there is no possible means to measure out how much violation of them is OK and how much is too much, we must not have any at all.
    There is a maxim of law, the legal system, which states that fraud vitiates all that it comes into contact with. Only a mere and brief contact is all that is required, not a thorough mixing in of the fraud like the spices in a cake mix! So we do not need some crazy idiot in a black robe who is self deluded into thinking that he/she has been elevated to being some kind of god or other, to adjudicate on the amount of fraud that is OK to have, and how much is too much!
    This card is indeed universal in nature, because if a fair trial cannot be guaranteed, then what is the point of having one? In a country under a Communist dictatorship, like we have here in America at present, where guilt is determined by criminals before the fake trials even begin, why bother with one? Why not just take all apprehended people, and execute them right there on the spot and save all of that wasted time, effort and money? What is to be gained by having any fake and rigged up trials, except to distract the populace from what is really going on?
    The legal system, as has been shown earlier, is just one big scam being run on us all! Papers such as The Legal System Is Even WORSE Than Gambling!, The Achilles’ Heel Of EVERYTHING In The Universe!, Pulling The Teeth Out Of The Mouth Of The Legal System, The Scam Of The Legal System, The Holes In The Legal System, Any Person Subject To…, Betrayal Of The Public’s Trust, I Do Not Recognize, Alleged Jurisdiction, Are These Questions Too Hot To Handle?, Do Not Detain Do Not Molest List and many more, are extra sources to read for this data and come to a greater understanding of the world around us.
    It IS the completely corrupted legal system with all of its Officers, Agents, Actors and Operators, that enforces the tyranny of the few upon the many of society. The legal system has NO justification for its breaking of its own rules and regulations! And THAT is why the legal system MUST be run on a completely voluntary basis, none can be compelled into joining it, if they do not want to, because it runs contrary to the laws of Nature and Nature’s God.
    When enough people are educated in these facts and can see the logic in them, they will begin to decline the offer to be a part of the criminal cabal we call the legal system, they will call it into question, and it will lose too much business to be able to stay in business! And speaking of business, EVERY courtroom in America is listed in Dun & Bradstreet as a business, because that is exactly what they all are! They are set up and run to generate profits off of the uneducated majority! What business can keep its doors open, if no profits are being made?
    What would happen, if just 4% of the people who are scheduled for a fleecing in the legal system, submitted an Affidavit to the court, stating that they promise to not commit any kind or amount of fraud, and demanded that every other participant must do the same? WHO will take up that challenge? Certainly not the fake judges with their prostituting attorneys they keep in their back pocket! Not one of the private attorneys or LIEyers will sign it! Not one Bailiff or any Clerk of the Court or Public Defender will do so either! No Deputies or police officers will ever dare go near it! Who will be left then, other than the Court Reporter, whose job is to record accurately the proceedings of the scams and other crimes going on in there? The Circus Maximus will be devoid of all of the men and women who put on the show trials, so there won’t be any need for any spectators to be there. Don’t forget to ask what is the EXACT AMOUNT of crime that any man or woman has a Right to commit or is obligated to endure, and what is the BASIC PREMISE that is being operated off of, in the instant case too!
    What do we do then to get our justice when we are injured in some way? We go back to Common Law Courts like we had before the case of Eerie R.R. Company v. Tompkins in 1939, when the legal system was hijacked by the criminal B.A.R. THAT is what we do! The jury of our actual peers get to decide our cases! “And who are a man’s Peers? They are his friends, neighbors and business acquaintances, for who else should know him better in order to judge him?”. Let those last few words weigh on your mind, for they ARE the truth that needs to be heard!

  10. In more thana fifty years of legal practice I’ve not seen anything as unfair as this judgment. As far as the NY attorney general is concerned, in my state I believe there would be a very good chance she would be disbarred for her antics. She is a threat to our legal system and our entire justice system. This also holds true of Judge Engeron.

    1. “As far as the NY attorney general is concerned, in my state I believe there would be a very good chance she would be disbarred for her antics. She is a threat to our legal system and our entire justice system. This also holds true of Judge Engeron.”
      +++

      Likely true in a sane state with an ethical bar association. But it appears Lavrentiy Beria established a law school somewhere in New York and we are seeing some of its graduates.

      It is possible to argue that AG James and the judge are engaging in criminal election interference under the color of law. James almost seems to have run on that platform. I hope a new federal AG will consider that. Lawfare can go both ways and we are in a Civil War.

      I hope to celebrate when NY goes bankrupt and the NYSE becomes the Dallas Stock Exchange.

      Meanwhile, Remington is closings its NY factory and moving south. Other businesses should get out before the kleptocrats pass a confiscatory departure tax to slow the rush to the border.

  11. Look at Tucker Carlson’s interview with Lydia Brimelow from Feb 19 or 20. To see what Leticia James is doing to a 501(c)3 she doesn’t like.
    Anyone who incorporates in New York, or who doesn’t immediately start to change their place of incorporation, is suicidal.

  12. Professor Turley,

    It is a complete fiction to argue that this was a victimless crime. Putting aside the almost $170 million owed to Deutsche Bank in interest due to Trump’s false claims, white collar financial fraud is not a victimless crime, unless you assume banks have an infinite amount of resources. By lying to obtain loans, others, who are unable to secure those loans are directly affected.

    And even if you don’t think those victims matter, this entire framing of the issue is not how our justice system works.

    The premise that Trump’s lies should not be penalized because the loans were repaid is akin to when a state suspends a driver’s license for drunk driving when the driver fails to crash his car. We can imagine a person who drove drunk but didn’t crash might think it unfair to revoke their license. It’s a victimless crime, they might say; no one was hurt that night. But I gather we are accustomed to the idea that it’s the established risk of harm, not actual harm, that is the plausible reason to withdraw the license. A person might have somehow made it home safely last night, but perhaps it’s not a bad idea to take away the keys for a bit so they don’t engage in that same risky conduct again tomorrow night. The state has granted the person a driver’s license, premised on the idea that the person will drive reasonably safely. But when a person has been shown to drive dangerously, the state will come in and revoke the license.

    The case against Trump and his business entities, I take it, was sort of a business equivalent of that. Trump and his business associates were engaged in so much lying, and so much fraud, the Judge concludes. And their credibility on the stand was, as the Judge puts it, severely compromised. They were able to repay the loans, true, but they wouldn’t have gotten the loans without the lies. And they reaped massive profits from lying, Judge Engoron concludes, as they were able to make deals they wouldn’t have been able to make, and at rates they wouldn’t have been able to get, had they been truthful. Acting as chancellor in equity, Judge Engeron requires Trump and the businesses to give up their ill-gotten gains, says Trump can’t run a New York business for three years, and imposes other equitable remedies.

    1. On its face, a penalty of nearly half a billion dollars is hard to fathom given that no lender or insurer claimed it suffered a financial loss as a result of the transactions at the center of the case, which was brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. But the law under which James sued Trump and his co-defendants does not require any such loss. The money demanded by Engoron’s 92-page decision, which goes to the state rather than individual claimants, is styled not as damages but as “disgorgement” of “ill-gotten gains.” It is aimed not at compensating people who were allegedly harmed by Trump’s misrepresentations but at deterring dishonesty that threatens “the financial marketplace.”
      https://reason.com/2024/02/19/how-a-judge-arrived-at-a-staggering-disgorgement-order-against-trump/

      Also, the NY public was harmed by Trump paying less taxes on his deflated property values.

      1. Hey Moron, do you think that cities tax real estate by what you claim it is worth? Real genius.

      2. Also, the NY public was harmed by Trump paying less taxes on his deflated property values.

        You keep repeating the lie. Pony up the math or make the correction

        1. Not same anonymous. But it is pretty hard to argue with the MAL fraud. The deed restricted valuing it as a private residence. This was done in order to pay significantly lower property taxes in FL. Yet, he valued MAL on his financial statements as worth more than $1B, which would require valuing it not only as a private residence but as more than the most expensive private residence listed in the country by approximately 400%. As Engoron noted, “there is no legal gray area surrounding the permanent nature of the deed restrictions.”

          This fraudulent activity clearly deprived FL residents of significant tax revenue if Trump actually believed it was a private residence.

          1. PArdon me for asking, but was this case brought in Florida? No, I didn’t think so.

            1. That is not how our legal system works. The transactions occurred in NYC under NY law.

            1. What are you talking about? READ THE DECISION. Fraudulent SFCs (Statements of Financial Condition) were used to obtain real estate loans at favorable rates and other benefits. The SFCs were the basis on which Deutsche Bank and other lenders agreed to extend credit and make real estate loans to the Trump Organization and agreed to do so on favorable terms. The credit and loans were extended at more faborable rates based on Trump’s personal guarantee, which in turn was accepted as sufficient based on the SFCs.

              It is absolutely fraudulent to agree to certain restrictions on real property in order to take advantage of tax benefits, and then to turn around and represent to lenders and others that no such restrictions exist in order to secure a larger collateral base for loans.

              From the decision:

              “In 1995 Donald Trump signed a Deed of Conservation and Preservation in which he gave up the right to use Mar-a-Lago for any purpose other than as a social club (the “1995 Deed”).

              “In 2002, Donald Trump granted a conservation easement to the National Trust for Historic Preservation and signed a deed in which, in addition to conveying the rights to develop or use Mar-a-Lago for any purpose other than a social club, the Deed further “limits changes to the Property including, without limitation, the division or subdivision of the Property for any purpose, including, without limitation, the interior renovation of the mansion, which may be necessary and desirable for the sale of the property as a single family residential estate, the construction of new buildings and the obstruction of open vistas.”

              “In exchange for executing the 2002 Deed, in which he gave away, in perpetuity, the right to develop or use the property as a single family residence, Donald Trump paid significantly lower property taxes on Mar-a-Lago.

              “McConney had in his possession, since at least 2011, a copy of the 2002 Deed ,restricting the use of Mar-a-Lago as a single-family residence. McConney was also aware, when he prepared the SFCs supporting data, that the entire basis of the valuations of Mar-a-Lago rested on the premise that it could be sold as a private residence to an individual. Each and every year, he valued Mar-a-Lago as if it could be sold as a single-family residence, notwithstanding the deeded prohibitions against such use in perpetuity.

              “Further, when Patrick Birney took over for McConney in preparing the valuations for the SFCs, Weisselberg and McConney both concealed from Birney the 1995 and 2002 deeds, When valuing Mar-a-Lago on the SFC from 2016-2021, McConney and Weisselberg selected comparables for Birney to use that were exclusively for private residences.

              “There is no legal gray area surrounding the permanent nature of the deed restrictions.”

              “Accordingly, there can be no mistake that Donald Trump’s valuation of Mar-a-Lago from 2011 was fraudulent.”

              1. You cant keep up with your own lies

                you commented “Also, the NY public was harmed by Trump paying less taxes on his deflated property values.”

                Tax assessment does not consider the owners valuation. Property owners do not submitt a form the county assessor with the owners opinion on what the assesment might be.

                You keep posting the same lie.

      3. The duplicity of the left is just astounding! They want you to believe that President Trump got loans from lenders by inflating values of assets, and at the same time fostering the notion that he undervalued his assets to take tax advantages which harmed New York citizens. It causes one to question their understanding of fiancés especially in real estate transactions, and these numskull’s vote! And one may wonder how our debt has surpassed $34,279,531,400,000 just moments ago.

      4. 1- Yet the court admitted that not a single dollar was lost by the banks from these dealings.

        a-) Indeed, witnesses testified that they wanted to do more business with Trump, who was described as a “whale” client with high yield business opportunities.

        B-) Undervaluing and overvaluing property is a longstanding practice in New York real estate. The forms submitted by the Trump organization cautioned the banks to do their own estimates and the loans were paid in full and on time.

        ——–“emphasizing disclaimers on the documents that he says alerted lenders to do their own homework. The disclaimers say, among other things, that the financial statements aren’t audited and that others “might reach different conclusions” about Trump’s financial position if they had more information.”————–Deutsche Bank’s private wealth management unit, which handled the loans, wouldn’t have approved them without a “strong financial guarantee” from Trump, Haigh said.———–Haigh said he reviewed Trump’s financial statements before approving the loans and, at the time, had no reason to doubt their validity.———–Deutsche Bank representatives also met with Trump Organization executives to go over the information, and the bankers looked at bank account and brokerage statements to verify his cash holdings, he said.———-“I assumed that the representations of the assets and liabilities were broadly accurate,” Haigh said of Trump’s financial statements.————–financial statement listed his net worth as $4.3 billion, though Deutsche Bank pegged it around $2.4 billion in an internal credit report.”——

        2- Much of the criticism of the decision focused on the unprecedented use of the law and the excessive size of the fine. The New York statute has been on the books for decades and has always been something of an anomaly in not requiring an actual victim or loss to justify disgorgement or fines.

        A-) An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.

        B-) Even the New York Times agreed that it could not find a single case in history where this statute was used against an individual or a company that did not commit a criminal offense, go bankrupt, or leave financial victims.

        3- YOU SAY: “Also, the NY public was harmed by Trump paying less taxes on his deflated property values.”

        This is false,
        -the judge found “THAT INFLATE THEIR STATES” “of fraud by exaggerating the value of Trump’s assets and net worth on his financial statements.” “after finding him liable of inflating his net worth by billions a year to get better loan and insurance terms.”

        That means: “pay the most taxes for the high values declared NOT LESS.” (If what you wrongly claim, we would have had a lawsuit from the IRS for tax evasion)

        1. Under NY law, Trump can be sued for lying on financial statements even if he didn’t default on the loans. He COULD HAVE defaulted, and if that had happened, the collateral would have been insufficient to cover the losses. This is how the NY AG protects the integrity of the financial market in New York, which is the financial capital of the world. The claim that under and over valuing property in NY is just an argument–there’s no proof of this, that other people lie as egregiously as Trump, and in any event, it’s not a defense to Trump’s lies. And, it’s not up to the various lenders to police Trump and his lies–that also is not a defense to misrepresentations on financial statments, which are submitted under the penalties for perjury. Weisselberg admitted that Trump misrepresented the size and value of his condo by $200 million.

      5. “. . . his deflated property values.”

        So which is it — inflated or deflated?

        Or is it whichever part of the contradiction allows the Left to destroy Trump?

    2. Putting aside the almost $170 million owed to Deutsche Bank in interest due to Trump’s false claims,

      $170 million? The math tells me, you are claiming the loan amount was $170 billion

          1. From the Opinion:

            “Michiel McCarty conducted an analysis of the risk differentials of various loans and loan proposals at issue in this action. In so doing, he “looked at the internal documents by Deutsche Bank of analyzing first the credit level of the guarantor versus the credit level of the collateral, then the project itself without a guarantee for the Doral, Old Post Office and Trump Chicago loans. In calculating the interest rate differentials for the perceived credit risks with and without a personal guarantee on the Doral loan, McCarty took the competing loan proposal terms that Deutsche Bank’s commercial real estate group had offered (which was LIBOR + 8% with a floor of LIBOR + 2% or 10%) and compared them to the terms extended by Deutsche Bank’s Private Wealth Management Division that were contingent upon a personal guarantee from Donald Trump (which was between 1.8% and 4.1%, depending on whether it was pre- or post-renovation). He also analyzed the Old Post Office and Trump Chicago Loan using the same method, comparing the terms offered by the Private Wealth Management Division, which were contingent on a personal guarantee and relied on his SFCs, with those offered by the commercial real estate group for a non-recourse loan.”

            “McCarty also testified that defendants profited by paying a lower interest rate on the 40 Wall Street Ladder Capital loan based on a fraudulent SFC than the interest rate with a non-recourse loan, and he compared the terms of the then-existing Capital One non-recourse loan that 40 Wall Street was subject to before refinancing, with the terms extended by Ladder Capital.

            “McCarty’s calculations determined that Donald Trump improperly saved the following amounts on interest as a result of the banks relying on Donald Trump’s fraudulent SFCs and personal guarantee: (1) $72,908,308 from 2014-2022 on the Doral loan; (2) $53,423,209 from 2015-2022 on the Old Post Office loan; (3) $17,443,359 from 2014-2022 on the Chicago loan; and (4) $24,265,291 from 2015-2022 on the 40 Wall Street loan.”

            Grand total: $168,040,167

            1. Term and amount.
              8 year term. still have no idea on amount.

              You’ve cut and pasted numbers you dont understand.

              Here’s the nugget
              the terms extended by Deutsche Bank’s Private Wealth Management Division that were contingent upon a personal guarantee from Donald Trump

              this was a signature note with collateral , has nothing to do with property valuations.

              It is not illegal

    3. Poor anon. Making up numbers to justify your position?

      Do you know how banks work?
      How they ascertain risk?
      How do they set the interest rate on loans?

      Didn’t think so.

      Trump’s lie is that he over estimated the value of his property at the time.
      That’s not a lie and Engoron and James should be sanctioned by the Bar, except that they are all lawyers and just as corrupt.
      (Sorry to those lawyers here… but you know all those lawyer jokes exist for a reason.)

      The only material thing Trump told the banks were the properties that he was going to use for collateral to establish his net worth.
      Beyond that… the banks did their own due diligence. They always do. So even if they cut the property values in 1/2. And they set the loan amount to 80% of that… it was more than enough.

      Now for the fun part. They wanted Trump’s business because it also brought in more unrelated business. So they made money.
      This was in their testimony which Engoron ignored.

      Engoron did so much wrong here… it would be funny if it were not true.

      There was no crime.
      There was no fraud except for James.

      NY just put another nail in their coffin and Biden can’t get them enough migrants to help game the political numbers so they can get more reps in congress.

  13. An egregious incident of a partisan bureaucrat utilizing power, not to achieve the highest order of justice, but revenge and political machinations. This judge is a disgrace to his profession and should be held up for ridicule and ejection from his position but we all know that, in NYC, that will never happen. Sign me as an Upstate New Yorker tired of being held hostage by the insanity that is the NYC metropolitan cesspool ruining my state.

  14. 8th Amendment to the Constitution ensures you will not be unjustly imprisoned, fined or sentenced to excessive or unusual penalties that are disproportionately severe given the nature of the crimes you have committed.

    2. It’s a civil case, not a criminal case, and the disgorgement is proportionate, given the amounts of money involved.

  15. Run for the hills if you are a New York business owner and do not belong to the right political party.

    New York, where criminals beat up police and walk away free.

    1. EM, leaving NYC was the smartest thing I did despite the fact that I made a lot of money there. The only thing I have that remains there is a home in Manhattan, which I am thinking of selling because of NYC’s craziness and recent violence.

  16. “Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.” — Lavrentiy Beria, Joseph Stalin’s equivalent of Hitler’s Himmler.

      1. Hey Partisan hack, is Hilary in prison? Hunter? Joe? Joe’s brother? Lois Lehrner? Eric Holder? John Brennan? Clapper? Comey? BLM or Antifa goons? Only Dems can lie to Congress and not go to jail, be held in contemp of Congress and not go to jail, Have classified documents for DECADES and not be tried. Only people praying at clinics get put away. Block a highway, fine. Block an entrance to the airport, fine. Tear down the fence at the WH for HAMAS, no problem. Threaten Jews on campus, no problem.

        This two tiered system of justice is one of the greatest threats we face today. This is why I have been calling where we live Doblestandardstan for some time now.

    2. In that line – this:

      “I tell people all the time, if you looking for something you gonna find it,” Coleman said in the documentary. “So it becomes self-fulfilling in terms of ‘Well we go where the crime is,’ no, you’re going and you’re finding crime and if you went somewhere else, guess what? You find it there too.”

      “They come up with things to profile us for,” Crump jumped in. “And so whatever laws were made — I believe this … We can get rid of all the crime in America overnight, just like that, and people ask ‘How, Attorney Crump?’”

      “Change the definition of ‘crime,’” Crump continued. “If you get to define what conduct is gonna be made criminal, you can predict who the criminals are gonna be … They made the laws to criminalize our culture, black culture.”

      Crump then cited the deaths of Eric Garner and George Floyd, noting Garner was selling loose cigarettes and arguing Floyd was killed because he tried to buy cigarettes.

      https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/14/ben-crump-msnbc-contributor-suggests-re-defining-crime-accommodate-black-culture/
      ===============
      Thing is, I kind of agree with Benjamin Crump, and that is a bad thing. For example, should several cops intervene to stop a black guy for selling loosies? Or should they intervene with a whatever-race person selling loosies? Well, if you are going to put high taxes on cigarettes, to stop people from smoking, then selling loosies only increases the cost because Eric Garner was in it to make a profit. 20 loosies costs more than a pack of 20. So what is the state after – tax money, or a decrease in smoking. Plus, if Garner bough his product over the counter, then the anticipated tax had already been paid. Assuming they were bought in-state.

      The problem gets fuzzy at anything above that level, however. Does the black community, or any community become better if selling crack and meth are no longer crimes? Nope, they get worse. Even non-felonizing something as low level as shoplifting has serious bad effects for the black community, as stores shutter their doors and move away,

      But, I tell you something that would help black men tremendously – and in its way, not be unjust – NO MORE CHILD SUPPORT FOR ANY CHILD BORN OUT OF WEDLOCK! Not from the father, and not from the state. If you are a woman, and you choose to screw around and have a baby, then you pay for it, or you go to your family or church for help. Because your family and your church is not going to keep helping you if you do not become responsible and stop having babies.

      But that will never go over, and even Ben Crump would be against it.

      1. Floyd, I usually agree with you 100% but not this time. What Crump is arguing for isn’t selling loose cigarettes as being the crime, he is arguing that car jacking, robbery, looting, burglary and some assaults should not be crimes. Does anyone really think that selling loose cigs in NYC will result in being prosecuted? The only person that would be prosecuted over cigs would be some bodega owner who tried to stop a thief from stealing his product. Ask the bodega owner that killed the guy beating him in his own store and was of course put in Rikers without bail until Mayor Adams forced the charges to be dropped. Ask Daniel Penny.

        Why is it that Soros DAs are not charging people crimes? It is so that they can now argue, by stats, that crime is down in NYC, LA, SF, STL, Baltimore and a few other Soros led hell holes. Then they can say take money from cops since crime is down. It is a shell game that is dangerous for innocent people.

        1. I am not sure if Crump is actively arguing that carjacking, for example, should not be a crime. Because I do not even see him going that far. He is after “effect”, and to that end he is keeping it vague. He wants to imply that our criminal laws are racist somehow, because that is the effect that is after – There is racism!

          But if he gets too specific, then the effect disappears, because even MSNBC hosts do not want to get carjacked. It is that way with a lot of liberal/progressive ideas. They sound good, until you get specific. That is why they use the term “gender-affirming” care, instead of “castration.” Gender-affirming sounds warm and fuzzy, while castration and double-mastectomies sound so bloody and painful and awful and gross.

          I am with you on everything you said. The only point I agree with Crump on, is something like selling loosies, or even selling bootleg dvds in the hood. Other than that, re-naming crimes does not alter their bad effect, and the evidence is in on that, when WalMart or Walgreens has to pack up and leave the poorer neighborhoods.

          Crump is being disingenuous by not being specific. What he is doing, is the very essence of a dog-whistle.

          1. Floyd, I agree with everything you said in your reply…except that even MSNBC anchors don’t want to get carjacked. If Republicans promulgated a bill mandating 10 years for people convicted of carjacking Crump and the MSNBC radicals would fight it tooth and nail. Or Soros puppets wouldn’t charge the crime and instead would charge for “unauthorized joy riding”.

  17. So there is major news about the witness agains the Biden’s and JT writes about trumps fines for the fraud he committed.
    Yea JT, distraction much? JT, you testified that the impeachment process should begin in the house because of the star witness that could tie the President to bribes. That witness has now been arrested and appears to be a Russian stooge.

    trump committed fraud, rape, and is charged with a host of other crimes. He is getting his due after decades of screwing over everyone he comes in contact with, including a porn star. How about an update on how the Biden impeachment is going?

    2. “…Trump committed rape….” Was he charged with rape? Was there ever a police report of this rape? Was there any contemporaneous account of said rape?

      Boob, I hope someone accuses you or your son with an attack that happened 30 years ago, you deserve it.

      1. I’ve met a lot of people in my life, the vast majority are good people, easy to talk to, friendly.
        Then you go on line, and you get comments like this…”Boob, I hope someone accuses you or your son with an attack that happened 30 years ago, you deserve it.”
        Really? You wish ill on someone you don’t know because of a comment they make. Wow, I would hope I never met you in person. What a disgusting member of the human race you are. I deserve it?
        The judge in trump E. Jean Carol case said the jury could assume trump committed rape based on the definition he gave them.

        1. You are hanging a guy, Trump and probably Kavanaugh, for the violent crime of rape when there was no police report and no action taken for 30 years!!!! What you are doing by saying Trump committed rape when he wasn’t indicted, charged or found guilty is horrendous and therefore you should suffer the same fate. I would never say you should be attacked or your family should be attacked, but you should suffer the same fate that you are hitting others with and lying about it.

        2. Bob, you accuse Hullbobby of “You wish ill on someone you don’t know because of a comment they make.” and follow by saying to Hullbobby, “What a disgusting member of the human race you are.”

          You are the one who is always wishing ill on others, not Hullbobby. You lie about them and impune their motives.

          You are the poor excuse of an intelligent person of goodwill. People are telling you that YOU deserve the same fate you wish toward others, and you don’t even get that straight. You are a boob and prove it in almost every post.

          Stop lying. Stop wishing ill on others.

    3. JT, you testified that the impeachment process should begin in the house because of the star witness that could tie the President to bribes

      You have repeated this lie before
      Provide the evidence or make the correction

    1. There is no Civil War going on. There are only people advocating it. I think such advocacy is dangerous. A Civil War would only harm the country.

      1. Absolutely. the trumpists are a truly extraordinary group that imputes everyone else is bad when they are the ones doing exactly what they accuse others of.

        2. We have elections, the winner assumes office. the loser cries in their beer and comes up with a better plan, usually.
          That portion of our election process was broken on Jan 6, 2021 when trump thought he could lie his way to a second term after losing the election.

        3. Mistressadams,
          I agree.
          It is a soft war right now.
          The assaults on decency. The assault on education. The assault on common sense. The assault on free speech on college campuses. The assault on law and order.

  20. “It is a curious legal system where defendants can be priced out of appeals.”

    I’ll believe that Turley means this when he makes the same argument for low income defendants.

          1. Floyd, this particular “Anonymous” is just a little girl or boy living at home being contrarian because “adults are all so stupid”.

            1. I can’t tell the little boogers apart. Gigi seems to dovetail with DM. One Anon is just a rage-bunny, and at least Anon is good. I am not sure that one or two people are not behind all of them, and I only respond when it suits my purposes. Some of them have been here for a while, haven’t they?

          2. I’m the same person that Henry (oldmanfromkansas) knows as A.N.D.
            Ask him whether I’m a shill, or if instead he’s had serious extended exchanges with me.
            And no, I’m not paid.

    2. Professor Turley makes the point this is a unique situation. Please post a link to a statement of his suggesting a “low income defendant” should be treated in this way.

      1. I didn’t say that JT had suggested that low income defendants be treated this way. Quite the opposite; he is silent about it, which is my point: low income defendants are generally “priced out of appeals,” in fact that happens MUCH more often, yet he’s silent about it. He only voices concern if Trump may have difficulty. Aside from which, Trump claims to have $400M in liquid assets, and he can easily turn to a wealthy supporter and ask for a loan.

Comments are closed.