Posted on 02/21/2024 5:10:27 AM PST by JV3MRC
President Trump was not allowed to put on a defense of the facts, he was only allowed to present witnesses to mitigate the extent of the fines (which the judge clearly rejected).
His appeal should be one of due process and equal protection under the law. The judge decided that Trump was guilty without even conducting the trial.
-PJ
-PJ
The New York Stock Exchange should move out of New York ...
I've been posting this example to make the point:
President Trump has said in the past that he has "brand value" that makes Trump properties more valuable just because it's a Trump property.As a case in point, in 2015 John Lennon's 1962 J-160E Gibson acoustic guitar was sold at an auction in Beverly Hills, California for $2.41 million. The catalog price for that guitar in 1964 was $219.50 and the current value of one in excellent condition is $4,000.
If I had owned that guitar in 2015 and chose not to auction it and instead used it as collateral for a loan claiming a value of $2.5 million, would Letitia James sue me because the real value of the guitar is $4,000?
Does John Lennon's "brand" add $2 million to the value of the guitar?
-PJ
Every one of them is lending money based on appraised values of collateralized assets, and packaging loans for resale on the secondary market. Any one of these lenders could be prosecuted by Leticia Mugabe under the same stupid law they applied in Trump’s case.
In fact, every institutional investor and lender in New York should have opened up their business day yesterday with an internal initiative to appraise all of their assets at $0 and deal with them accordingly. It may be the only protection they have under the law as applied.
Interesting thought. At some point though the individual “fraud” is a negligible part of the basket sold. Those types of lawsuits would be brought between a buyer and seller in traditional lawsuits and not by an attorney general.
1. The risk here involves a state case, not a civil matter between borrowers and lenders. The State of New York has effectively made itself a potentially “injured” party in every financial transaction in the state.
2. There’s no such thing as “negligible” under New York law. Donald Trump was just successfully sued in a case where the fraud was non-existent as a civil matter.
Time for NYC to go Galt. Stop participating in their own demise.
Trump waved the right to a jury trial in one of these indictmets, realizing the futility in Engoran’s court, and waiting for the appeals court.
Wasn’t this the one ?
Ah! Okay...:)
That said, Engeron granted Leticia James' motion for a summary judgement of guilty, meaning that the "trial" was over before it started. Trump was not allowed to cross-examine state fact witnesses, or provide exculpatory evidence. They proceeded directly to the penalty phase where Trump was only allowed to challenge the fine.
-PJ
The law is on the state books. It has yet to be challenged. The law, as written or at least as interpreted by the awful judge, does not require a loss by the bank. Everyone is screaming “no loss” seems to miss the point that the state knew there was no loss before filing the case. The judge agrees. In fact, the bank made money on the loan. The documentation supporting the loan is the case. Trump would call it “perfect.” The state and the judge say he inflated values and his net worth. It looks like he did. All the rest is poppycock. The huge amount of the penalty is based on the favorable interest rate received on the arguably “inflated” property values and net worth. So there is obviously a difference.
Thank you
I understand it somewhat better now.😉
Isn’t practicing real estate without a license a crime, maybe a misdemeanor at least?
And to appraise property of Florida from the bench in NY should be!🤨
I’ve been pointing that out for months.
NYC and county would be out millions. Then every property owner should follow Trump and demand reevaluations.
ROFL...the Constitution?
Ha ha. How quaint!
I can’t possibly portray my hatred for these human scumbags in strong enough terms.
I’d get banned for life.
Byron York writes today that Trump was prohibited from a jury trial by law. Letitia James structured the indictment so that no jury was possible.
Judge Engoron referenced this law in his 92 page judgment.
FYI
Later, Engoron said it wouldn't have mattered anyway as James structured the case as you said.
The other point still stands that Engoron moved straight to summary judgement, so Trump was denied a trial of fact to cross-examine witnesses and present exculpatory evidence, not that any of it would have mattered to this judge.
-PJ
Trump’s team was castigated for failing to check the box, but it was a moot point.
I’ve heard York’s article, but not yet read it. It’s filled with Engoron abuses, front to back. An appeals court will embarrass themselves if they don’t dismiss/reduce to a large degree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.