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.
Professor Turley continues to mislead people on NY law. Trump does not need to file a bond to perfect his appeal. The bond is needed to stay collection in the judgment.
If he cannot afford a bond, then he could ask for an expedited scheduling of his appeal.
Dennis, it is you who continue to mislead. This is legalized extortion and the distinction between posting an absurdly high bond to appeal an absurdly large fine is a practical bar to appeal.
But doesn’t the bond have to be posted in 30 days (or the fine paid with the chance of recouping it if successfully appealed)? What court(s) are going to expedite scheduling that fast?
And why would a defendant place at risk a judgement so large in expediting an appeal? How is “either pay up or press your appeal immediately” constitutional?
Dennis,
Lets use round numbers.
Interest on the fine is 90K a day.
How long does the appeal take?
Lets say 1 yr. now you could use 30/360 (BB)
That’s 2.7M a month , 32.4 M a year on the interest alone. (Not using compounded interest.)
So if Trump fights and loses. That over 30M in additional cash he would have to cough up.
And if he doesn’t pay during the appeal. James could take legal action against him to seize the property.
So he can fight, State of NY seizes and liquidates his property pennies on the dollar and takes more to settle the debt.
-G
Even a leftist like Jimmy Dore gets it:
“ It is a curious legal system where defendants can be priced out of appeals.” ~ Turley
But this has long been the case. Defendants in asset forfeiture cases having property taken and little recourse. Small mom & pops hit with huge daily fines by an unelected administrative state. Trump’s case and judgement against him is over the top, but he’s just one in a long line.
In Trump’s case Amendment Article VIII states: “Excessive bail shall not be required,
nor excessive fines imposed…” If the SCUSA has any interest in judicial integrity, it
should take up Trump’s NY case and dismiss it with prejudice. In addition the NY
trial and decision surely also violate Amendment Articles VI, Vii. and XIV Sect. 1.
But can they?
At what point should they step in?
“IS THE END NEAR?”
_______________________
“The Prentis Cycle”
“From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to freedom; from freedom to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency ; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to fear; from fear to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more.”
– Henning Webb Prentis Jr., 1946
_____________________________________
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy–to be followed by a dictatorship.”
– Alexis de Tocqueville (attribution ?)
In this case Antonymous is John Howard Wilhelm, Ann Arbor. MI
Jonathan: This is your third column trying to convince us Judge Engoron’s judgment is an “absurd imposition of $455 million in fines and interest against Donald Trump…”. There’s nothing new in this column. It appears to be the Goebbels’ propaganda strategy. Repeat a lie often enough and people will begin to believe it.
The reason for the high judgment is that DJT engaged in “astronomical” financial fraud–probably unprecedented in NY history. So, yes, if DJT can’t pony up to appeal the judgment he might be forced into “selling off assets at distress prices”. So, what? As you title your column yesterday it’s all about “Pay to Play”. If DJT wants to appeal the judgment he must comply with NY law that requires posting the entire amount of the judgment. It’s the same law that applies to all defendants. DJT is not being singled out.
Now you are fond of quoting Oscar Wilde. But the quote you use is irrelevant here because Wilde was referring to his gay proclivities. Judge Engoron didn’t take Wilde “to heart” in his 92-page decision. He did quote Alexander Pope: “The English poet Alexander Pope…first declared ‘To err is human, to forgive is Divine’. Defendants apparently are of a different mind”. That’s the quote you should have used.
The problem for DJT is that he owes an additional $87,502 in post-judgment interest every day until he pays the $354 million. That’s over $600,000 in interest every week. That means if he loses on appeal he will have to pay both pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. And, as you point out, if DJT can’t come up with the money AG James will go back to Judge Engoron to request seizure of some of DJT assets. Again, not unusual. If a defendant can’t pay you seize their assets.
Early on in the litigation with AG James, DJT lawyers should have urged him to negotiate a settlement. That would have been less costly than what he now faces. If I were in DJT’s position I would pay the judgment and move on–just to avoid all the interest. Or I would file for bankruptcy. But DJT is not about to do the latter. That wouldn’t look good on his presidential resume–filing for bankruptcy right in the middle of a his campaign. He would probably have to delete the part in his resume about being a “very successful businessman”. Plus, with a history of six previous bankruptcies another one would not appeal to a lot of voters.
Whatever happens DJT’s ship is sinking and it’s sinking fast!
Comnie
Dennis – he will not lose on appeal, even in New York State.
Dennis thanks: I agree with everything you wrote except for the part about DJT flushing the judgment by filing for bankruptcy. While I’m no BK practitioner, my understanding is that judgments for fraud are NOT dischargeable. If someone is a BK expert and says otherwise, I wouldn’t argue.
You are spot-on about settlement being the better course, especially right after the summary judgment was granted. But, for Trump, the issue wasn’t financial practicality–it’s the chance for more publicity, more donations, and another chance to play the victim. He’s looking to his fans to pay the tab. Plus, he gets in licks against the judicial system, against which he is waging war. The appeal will not fly, IMHO, because of Judge Engoron’s well-reasoned findings of fact and conclusions of law. As you say, the amount is high, but so is the degree of wrongdoing.
Gigi: Sorry for the delay in getting back to you. One caveat. I am no expert on bankruptcy law. My area of concentration was aviation law. That said, either the Trump Org. or DJT could file for bankruptcy. But it’s unlikely a bankruptcy court would allow him to discharge the full amount of the judgment. Which means he would still have to sell some of his properties to satisfy the judgment.
Alina Habba says DJT will come up with the money for the appeal bond. Can we trust her word? With her track record I doubt we should believe anything she says. Remember she predicted DJT would win the case before Judge Engoron. But even if DJT comes up with the money what bond company would want him as a client? Bond companies don’t like taking real estate as collateral. Besides, DJT’s appeal will take years. What bond company in their right mind would want to try to enforce an indemnity agreement against the possible next President?
And then there is the $83.3 million judgment against DJT in the E. Jean Carroll case. Debtors can’t use bankruptcy to discharge debts from a defamation case. Alex Jones and Rudy Giuliani found that out the hard way when they filed for bankruptcy.
By the way, keep up your good work on this blog!
Thanks Dennis. I saw a report that one of Trump’s lawyers wrote a letter to Judge Engoron, suggesting that he agree to a settlement for a lower amount. There is such a thing as a petition for remittitur, but I don’t think it’s done by a letter to a judge. I’ve never filed one. The report might be BS.
As to the fraud judgment, since there’s no crime involved, I don’t think Trump could get out of it with a “pardon” even in the unlikely event that he somehow could cheat his way back into office. There’s no “pardon “ for a civil case. What do you think?
gigi, LOVE your ability to cut and paste stuff from the media or from other comments here, and act like it is your own idea or opinion. LOL when I saw you pretend to educate us with your sentence “there is something called remittitur.” You probably never even heard that word before today, when someone else brought it up in a comment, Sam or Lin or Gumby or Daniel.
gigi, you are such a cute little joke.
Gigi: I don’t know whether remittitur applies. The purpose of remittitur is, after a jury verdict, to give the trial court the ability, with plaintiff’s consent, to correct an equitable damages award or verdict without ordering a new trial. It’s too late for that now. Besides AG James would never agree. She has just made her proposed judgment order.
But notice today DJT has asked Judge Engoron to postpone entering the judgment order. It’s a desperate attempt to delay the inevitable. Read DJT’s attorney, Cliff Roberts’ letter to Judge Engoron. That won’t fly. It’s pretty clear DJT doesn’t have the money to post the appeal bond.
Dennis: I don’t know very much about remittitur–or additur, for that matter, because although I have experience in trials to the bench and to a jury, I’ve never had occasion to file either one. I’ve seen opinions regarding both, and relief under either theory is rarely granted, especially if the award is supported by the evidence, which it is in this case. And, that’s what I find most disturbing about Turley’s post — the assumption that the admittedly large award is excessive because that’s the pro-Trump talking point. Judge Engoron’s opinion very carefully lays out the evidence and basis for the award. Turley also echoes the other Trump talking points–e.g., no victim, the lenders were paid, etc, knowing that there is a cause of action under NY law regardless of whether Trump defaulted on the loan. Trump COULD have defaulted–he has done so in the past–6 times he took bankruptcy, and if he had done so with these loans, the collateral would not have been sufficient and the lenders would have had huge losses. None of the pro-Trump talking heads ever mentions these facts. Turley also whines about NY law requiring posting cash or a bond to cover the judgment, as if this is unfair–but that’s the law in NY, and it’s calculated to protect the winner of the judgment. Turley also unfairly criticizes Judge Engoron, who could have gone much further, including dissolving The Trump Organization and permanently barring DJT and his family members from doing business in the State of New York–but, he didn’t.
If Turley really wanted to use his credentials in a constructive manner, he should have commented on Trump rolling the dice after losing summary judgment–I’m certain his counsel told him there was going to be a money judgment, and that would have been the point where Trump could have had some control over the outcome and cut his losses–but his ego got in the way, plus he has assumed either the RNC or his gullible followers would pay the judgment and accruing interest. In fact, he’s trying to instaill his daughter-in-law as head of the RNC I find that immoral, because the majority of Trump followers are working-class people who have been fed a steady stream of lies. At the end of the day, this is all Trump’s fault–not the fault of the AG, who is sworn to protect the interests of the State of New York, not Judge Engoron, who swore an oath to uphold NY law, and not even the fault of the NY legislature–they passed laws to protect the integrity of the financial market which is based in NYC, and to protect winners in lawsuits.
What I don’t get is the passion with which pro-Trumpsters rail against this judgment and aftermath–including the doomsday language–why do they care about this mess that Trump got into due to his own fault and ego? None of them could get away with lying on loan applications. If they’ve been paying attention, they know that Trump couldn’t care less about anyone other than himself–including them–and he’s using them to get them to pay for his lies.
Gigi: I agree. As to Turley’s columns about Judge Engoron’s decision and orders it’s not about a a careful analysis of the opinion to point out where the judge might have erred in his factual or legal conclusions. Turley’s job is to rile up the MAGA crowd to convince them there has been a grave injustice with the “absurd imposition of $455 million in fines and interest”. And I doubt Turley knows very much about NY’s anti-fraud statute. Otherwise he wouldn’t use the term “fines”. It’s actually “disgorgement” of money obtained through fraud. If you look at the history of Turley’s columns it’s about echoing whatever is the Fox talking point of the day. That’s his second paid job when he is not teaching torts to first year law students.
As to the summary judgment against DJT back in Sept. of last year he should have seen it coming. DJT’s lawyers, if they had been professional, would have urged their client to try to settle. There was every indication a train wreck was coming DJT’s way. But DJT doesn’t hire professionals. He hires lawyers to do his bidding because with all his experience with litigation DJT thinks the right strategy is delay, delay and delay–then appeal hoping your opponent will get tired and settle for cents on the dollar. That has worked in the past. But in this ligation DJT ran into an unmovable object, AG Letitia James, who has a lot of experience in dealing with people like DJT. To her credit James is going to put both the NRA and DJT out of business–all in the same year!
The Q is why has DJT put himself in this no-win situation? As a pathological narcissist DJT doesn’t want to appear “weak”. His followers expect him to stand up to an “illegitimate legal system” so he attacks the judge, the chief clerk, the prosecutors and the witnesses arrayed against him. It’s his ego that overwhelmed what should have been common sense. That’s why they say “your ego is not your amigo”.
“And then there is the $83.3 million judgment against DJT in the E. Jean Carroll case.”
You call this justice? Really, Denny?
No sane person could call this just. No one sane.
So that eliminates you, Den Den. We all know you are an off the deep end lefty lune. Obvi.
Gigi – I am quoting the relevant part of 11 USC 523:
“(a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1192 [1] 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt—
. . . .
(2) for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by—
(A) false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;
(B) use of a statement in writing—
(i) that is materially false;
(ii) respecting the debtor’s or an insider’s financial condition;
(iii) on which the creditor to whom the debtor is liable for such money, property, services, or credit reasonably relied; and
(iv) that the debtor caused to be made or published with intent to deceive; [.]”
This statute uses the strict definition of common law fraud requiring an intentional and material false statement, and reasonable reliance by an actual creditor,
By this standard, the award made by Judge Engoron would NOT be exempted from discharge. It has already been established that there was no creditor claiming a loss, nor was their reliance by anyone on the valuations.
Sorry to break the bad news.
edwardmahl: a business law professor at Case Western Reserve disagrees with you. From “Newsweek”:
Bankruptcy is unlikely to save Donald Trump from having to pay the millions of dollars he owes from recent lawsuits, a legal expert has said.
Eric C. Chaffee, a business law professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, told Newsweek that Trump would still have to sell property to pay for the $450 million he owes in fraud and defamation judgments.
“With the recent judgments against former President Trump, the future of his real estate empire is in doubt,” Chaffee said.
Even if Trump declares bankruptcy to avoid paying, “he may not be able to discharge the liability against him in that process” because a court will not allow him to write off the full amount of the judgments.
“Even if a bankruptcy court is willing to allow him to discharge some of that liability, he likely will have to sell some of his property in the process to satisfy the judgments against him,” he said.
Chaffee said that Trump may resist bankruptcy.
“Although his organizations have declared bankruptcy in the past, he has vowed not to declare personal bankruptcy,” he noted.
Anyway, WHY do you care about whether Trump can get away with lying on financial statements in order to borrow more money and on better terms than if he told the truth? Are you going to pony up some of your wealth to bail him out of this mess he caused? If you are–why?
To whom does Trump owe this interest? You don’t seem to say.
The State of New York, which obtained the judgment. Interest was assessed going back to the date the complaint was filed.
Actual Americans desire nothing more than freedom and free markets.
Communists desire nothing less than “free stuff” and “free status.”
________________________________________________________________________
“And never the twain shall meet.”
– Rudyard Kipling
“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.”
– Thomas Jefferson
Yes, Jonathan, it’s so unfair how Trump is being treated by the judicial system. The first thing he did after being elected in 2016 was agreeing to pay $25 million to numerous Trump University students who were conned & in some cases bankrupted by false claims to be taught the “secrets of success” in the real estate industry. Students were charged $35,000 for Gold Elite classes at Trump University. Trump shut down Trump U after paying the $25 million.
A year after Trump took office, he was ordered to shut down his Trump Foundation after it was discovered he was using charity donations to pay off legal settlements within his business and buying a painting of himself to hang in one of his golf clubs. Trump ended up paying a court-ordered $2 million to 8 different charities for misusing their charity funds for his own political gain.
Trump called the Supreme Court “totally incompetent” for ruling that Texas had no standing to challenge Biden’s victory in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan & Wisconsin. Trump said “We have absolute PROOF, but they don’t want to see it – No ‘standing’, they say. If we have corrupt elections, we have no country!” That was 10 days before Congress certified Biden’s victory on January 6, 2021.
Those judicial rulings may well shock the conscience of Turley & Kevin O’Leary, but it doesn’t particularly look good on your resume when you’re ordered to shut down your charity foundation after using donations for your own personal use & conning everyday Americans into becoming financially crippled by your shady business practices.
Why should Trump not object to dismissal of the Texas appeal on ground of standing. The appeal should have been heard. What is the point of having courts if they refuse to consider meritorious disputes?
Edward: there wasn’t any merit to the Big Lie. 3 years on, and there’s no evidence of any widespread fraud. Texas has no standing to involve itself in election matters outside of its borders.
. . . because the electon of a national office-holder was involved, which obviously affects Texas.
Texas tried to intervene in the election process of a sister state–it had no standing to do so. Elections are state-run. And, anyway, Trump lost, there was NO widespread fraud.
Well, on the bright side, the judgment amount is tax-deductible, as is the E. Jean Caroll farce.
How long do the judicial branch and Supreme Court fail to act under the fullness of the power of judicial review to eliminate abuse of the judicial system and political lawfare in the courts, restore juridical impartiality, statutory pertinence, and integrity, and assure the dominion of the clear meaning and intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
163 years ago, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney acted necessarily and immediately within days to strike down Lincoln’s flagrant power grab, suspending habeas corpus:
“The clause in the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is in the ninth section of the first article. This article is devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive Department.”
“I can see no ground whatever for supposing that the President in any emergency or in any state of things can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power.”
“I have exercised all the power which the Constitution and laws confer on me, but that power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome.”
– Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, May 28, 1861
My friends from Cuba have stated that this is how it started under Castro.
The Law is now officially a Joke. Weaponized by the Left, enforced by a corrupt Judiciary, and manipulated by radical Leftists in the political system. A pressure is building on the right that is near explosive release. The Law is not fit for obedience or respect. The Right is rapidly ceasing to be intimidated by it. This will come to a head sooner than later. It’s time!
ADMONISHED BY THE AMERICAN FOUNDERS
“IT IS THEIR DUTY”
YOU “AMERICANS” ARE ABJECT FAILURES
______________________________________________
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
– Declaration of Independence, 1776
The judgment definitely violates the eighth amendment. The law that New York put in place violates not only common sense, but also the fourth Amendment requirement that there has to be probable cause of a crime.
Engoron clearly Violated the sixth amendment by not allowing President Trump to use Evidence in his favor, which would have thwarted the judge and AG’s case.
Both the judge and the AG must be disbarred for their actions. The president should file lawsuits against both under 42 USC 1983 civil action for deprivation of rights. This would hold both the judge and the AG personally responsible for the violation of the constitutional guarantees of the president.
“Both the judge and the AG must be disbarred for their actions.” And their tax-funded pensions garnished to repay the defendent. It’s the only way to lesson the chance others will repeat Engoron and James actions. The only way.
“Truer words have never been spoken.”
– M.E Grant Duffy, English MP
James asked for a summary judgement claiming that the facts of the case are not in disagreement.
Engoron as the judge, ruled in her favor and granted summary judgement.
At best you could set aside his ruling via an appeal, but he was within his right to grant the summary judgement.
Meaning he was doing what a judge normally does.
He then found against Trump. And set a fine. Again this is his job.
It doesn’t matter that he ignored the law… his excuse is that he didn’t believe Trump.
He made many mistakes along the way… all of which will factor into the appeal.
But you can’t go after him.
James is guilty of malicious prosecution.
She’s an easier target since she violated Trump’s constitutional rights under the color of law.
But even here its tough.
Election interference?
Sure. But again Engoron would be tougher to prosecute. Not impossible, but tougher.
Just be honest and admit that no one truly believes this case, judgment and fine are what justice should be in the United States. If you stripped out the name of the defendant, the defendant’s immutable characteristics, their political leanings, status, wealth and so on and merely looked at the bones of the case, you’d be left wondering what other than the law is the reason this person ended up on the radar for prosecution. In a city where they are hemorrhaging money to be a sanctuary for illegal immigrants, defunding law enforcement and with a massive outflow of their individual and business tax revenue, it’s counterintuitive to bring this “landmark” case without any bank alleging they were a victim of the defendant. It’s a stretch, but arguing the city and state of NY is doing this to recover lost tax revenue might have been somewhat persuasive had the city showed they cared about taxpayers, budgets and the law. It’s only when the defendant is identified that we can understand why this case was brought. And from that point forward, every argument made to support the results of the case are purely about who the defendant is and not actually about justice.
The whole sga with Trump os disgusting, decidedly un-American, I am shocked to see it even though I’ve always thought the dems were arrogant a-holes, and I weep for my country. People have no idea what they are asking for, and when they wake up, it will likely be too late. The parallels to the 30s or the fall of Rome are downright spooky.
I hope this case is reversed, that the AG and Judge are sued and disbarred, and that Soros’ influence is highlighted as what makes all this crap possible in our justice system. The founders are spinning in their graves. This kind of treatment is unbelievable and disgusting.
Well, yes it is a lot of money, but DJT has always claimed to have a lot of money. And the trial proved that that the Trump’s excessive wealth of obtained by not following the rules everyone else must obey. In real life, many ordinary people face civil forfeiture when the police seize property, and then they can’t hire a private attorney. Most plead guilty (in federal court, less than 1% of accused actually demand a jury trial, for various reasons including overcharging by the DA and legal fees) and accept time served because they can’t make bail, need to get home to children.
Sorry, I just don’t have a lot of sympathy for the Trumps
Unfortunately, the crime you referred to is the same thing that all the other real estate companies in New York and across the country do .if you have a home loan or business loan or second mortgage, I could probably get you convicted for the same crime. If I use the same tactics, these people used
They intentionally list uses for a property that are deed-restricted? Do you have any evidence for that claim?
I totally agree with your observation. A few years ago a friend of mine had to sell his car and lost his job when he was falsely accused by the Los Angeles County. At least Mr. Trump has the means to defend himself. I just hope he will hire competent attorneys, life would be a little easier for him.
Poor Jim.
How much are you worth.
How much of that is in cash?
Yeah that’s the point.
Take someone like Elon Musk. One of the richest men on the planet, yet he’s relatively illiquid in that most of his wealth is tied up in Tesla, X, etc …
Same for Trump.
So if he liquidates… there will be tangible losses … aka damages. That becomes actionable.
Engoron would be tough to touch.
Even if you were thinking of prosecuting him for election interference, there’s a lot of room for judges during a trial, and he’s pretty much untouchable…. but that doesn’t mean he can’t be touched. 😉
Everyone has skeletons in a closet.
-G
So would you feel differently if it were Joe Biden or Hunter Biden?
Personally, I would not feel differently. Wrong is wrong. Now, underlying that, is whether an actual “crime” has been committed. I think that Joe Biden has been a “crooked cop” for years. He used to be known as the Senator from MBNA. Some of that stuff was probably simple influence peddling of the sort every politician does. Not necessarily illegal. Then, we have John Gotti, Jr. doing a shakedown, and saying, we got to give 10% to the Big Guy. Then, 10% of the shakedown goes into Gotti, Sr.’s pocket. So yeah that is a crime.
With Trump, I do not see a crime, or an underlying action. The elements are vague, and if Trump were guilty, he did not make a $350 million profit thereby, nor did the lenders lose that amount.
But, if Biden had done the same thing as Trump, I would feel the same way.
My point is made. Ignoring the facts because of who the accused is demonstrates that Justice is not the issue here. Everyone involved, except the persecution, testified that the so called crime wasn’t a crime and that there was no harm done to anyone. The banks said “no problem.” The practice of claiming high property values has been common practice forever. The weaponization of the legal system apparently doesn’t concern some people.
It is possible to sympathize with both Trump and the victims of civil forfeiture laws, which are a kind of legalized government theft.
Turley wrote, “This should shock the conscience of anyone concerned about the integrity and fairness of the New York legal system.”
Well, then the country is fv(ked, because the Democrats ain’t go no conscience! It is all about win, win, win with them.
California has crafted an Exit Tax to mulct fat cats who want to escape to what’s left of America.
Given what happened to Trump in NY’s Stalinist judicial system businesses thinking of escaping should wonder if/when NY will adopt an Exit Tax.
A thought: calling them ‘Stalinist’ might be misinterpreted to be a complement. It isn’t.
Letitia can go to hell, except I don’t think even the devil wants her.
Not so fast, Cindy. I think they may be allies.