Trump's NY Civil Trial

G

Garmel

5,000+ Posts
I've been amazed at the brazen dishonesty from this AG's office. Look at this nonsense. This is regards to 40 Wall Street.
.
NY AG lawyer: It says it's marketed as a 72 story building but it's shorter. That it throws off $50 million a year.

It's actually 70 stories with two ground floors. :rolleyes1:
 
Saw DJTs lawyer at noon, she was fumed and made good points. Gave it to the DA, judge with both barrels. It's nothing more than a sham.
 
It might be a bogus case. I think it is - not because he didn't do anything but because it's one of these things that's routinely done without prosecution and because no damage was done. (That's why the banks aren't suing him.) It's like prosecuting someone for jaywalking. Yes, it's often against the law, but how often do you see that law enforced against anyone? Virtually never.

However, he is going to lose. It's not a jury trial, and the judge has already ruled against him on the merits. He's just deciding what the judgment will be, and it sounds like he's pretty partisan and pissed off. I would expect a pretty big judgment if he has the discretion, and like I've said, no NY appellate judge is going to rule with Trump. It would end his career.

What I'd do is appeal into the federal system and argue selective prosecution (basically a due process argument). It's a long shot. In fact I'm not sure I can think of a single case in which it has been tried it successful, but it could work with a favourable court.
 
If I was a lawyer, I’d be very disheartened with today’s judicial system which becomes more and more politically biased every day.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It might be a bogus case. I think it is - not because he didn't do anything but because it's one of these things that's routinely done without prosecution and because no damage was done. (That's why the banks aren't suing him.) It's like prosecuting someone for jaywalking. Yes, it's often against the law, but how often do you see that law enforced against anyone? Virtually never.

However, he is going to lose. It's not a jury trial, and the judge has already ruled against him on the merits. He's just deciding what the judgment will be, and it sounds like he's pretty partisan and pissed off. I would expect a pretty big judgment if he has the discretion, and like I've said, no NY appellate judge is going to rule with Trump. It would end his career.

What I'd do is appeal into the federal system and argue selective prosecution (basically a due process argument). It's a long shot. In fact I'm not sure I can think of a single case in which it has been tried it successful, but it could work with a favourable court.
Click to expand...

It's probably SCOTUS or bust for Trump here. However, the NY Supreme Court has surprised me on occasion especially in regards to stopping democrat gerrymandering. We'll see.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It might be a bogus case. I think it is - not because he didn't do anything but because it's one of these things that's routinely done without prosecution and because no damage was done. (That's why the banks aren't suing him.) It's like prosecuting someone for jaywalking. Yes, it's often against the law, but how often do you see that law enforced against anyone? Virtually never.

However, he is going to lose. It's not a jury trial, and the judge has already ruled against him on the merits. He's just deciding what the judgment will be, and it sounds like he's pretty partisan and pissed off. I would expect a pretty big judgment if he has the discretion, and like I've said, no NY appellate judge is going to rule with Trump. It would end his career.

What I'd do is appeal into the federal system and argue selective prosecution (basically a due process argument). It's a long shot. In fact I'm not sure I can think of a single case in which it has been tried it successful, but it could work with a favourable court.
Click to expand...
He is going to lose all of his cases due to the forums.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It might be a bogus case. I think it is - not because he didn't do anything but because it's one of these things that's routinely done without prosecution and because no damage was done. (That's why the banks aren't suing him.) It's like prosecuting someone for jaywalking. Yes, it's often against the law, but how often do you see that law enforced against anyone? Virtually never.

However, he is going to lose. It's not a jury trial, and the judge has already ruled against him on the merits. He's just deciding what the judgment will be, and it sounds like he's pretty partisan and pissed off. I would expect a pretty big judgment if he has the discretion, and like I've said, no NY appellate judge is going to rule with Trump. It would end his career.

What I'd do is appeal into the federal system and argue selective prosecution (basically a due process argument). It's a long shot. In fact I'm not sure I can think of a single case in which it has been tried it successful, but it could work with a favourable court.
Click to expand...

Check this out, Deez. Shouldn't the case get dismissed after this?

 
Garmel said:
Check this out, Deez. Shouldn't the case get dismissed after this?

Click to expand...


It won't, because it's coming from his wife. That's not gonna cut it. It's a little like the liberals wringing their hands about Clarence Thomas's wife and her political activities. Even if it doesn't look good, it's not going to be enough to get the case tossed. The bottom line is that when a state court system is hyperpartisan, it's not going to be fair in a politically charged case like this.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It won't, because it's coming from his wife. That's not gonna cut it. It's a little like the liberals wringing their hands about Clarence Thomas's wife and her political activities. Even if it doesn't look good, it's not going to be enough to get the case tossed. The bottom line is that when a state court system is hyperpartisan, it's not going to be fair in a politically charged case like this.
Click to expand...

You're right about the hyperpartisan stuff. However, I don't think it's similar to Ginny Thomas and her husband because Ginny wasn't in attack mode on one of the people going in front of Thomas.

Edit- I read that they're separated so it's probably a nothingburger.
 
Last edited:
Garmel said:
You're right about the hyperpartisan stuff. However, I don't think it's similar to Ginny Thomas and her husband because Ginny wasn't in attack mode on one of the people going in front of Thomas.

Edit- I read that they're separated so it's probably a nothingburger.
Click to expand...

I can see the distinction between this and Ginny Thomas. This lady is commenting on cases as they are pending before her husband’s court. It’s just really hard to imagine a NY court bailing Trump out. There’s just too much political cost in doing that. If he’s going to get out of this, it’s going to be through the federal system. Ditto for the criminal trial in NY.
 
Every conservative in the US should file a frivolous lawsuit against Letitia James in their home state. War is coming.
 
Y'all need to read this. Good stuff. As Deez said it probably won't do any good with how effed up NY's justice system is.

 
theiioftx said:
Every conservative in the US should file a frivolous lawsuit against Letitia James in their home state. War is coming.
Click to expand...

Pretty tough to get jurisdiction over James outside of New York, and it would be pointless to do anything to her in New York. And why bother? She's a *****, but she isn't calling the shots. Like other hyper-woke AGs and DAs, Soros is bankrolling her. If you really want to make a big impact, go after him and his organisation.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It might be a bogus case. I think it is - not because he didn't do anything but because it's one of these things that's routinely done without prosecution and because no damage was done. (That's why the banks aren't suing him.) It's like prosecuting someone for jaywalking. Yes, it's often against the law, but how often do you see that law enforced against anyone? Virtually never.

However, he is going to lose. It's not a jury trial, and the judge has already ruled against him on the merits. He's just deciding what the judgment will be, and it sounds like he's pretty partisan and pissed off. I would expect a pretty big judgment if he has the discretion, and like I've said, no NY appellate judge is going to rule with Trump. It would end his career.

What I'd do is appeal into the federal system and argue selective prosecution (basically a due process argument). It's a long shot. In fact I'm not sure I can think of a single case in which it has been tried it successful, but it could work with a favourable court.
Click to expand...

The whole problem with this case is that valuations of property are subjective and the government has zero business telling Trump what they are. The judge has said that Mar-a-Lago is worth 18 to 27 million while an expert Trump used said it could be worth a billion.
 
I'm still having a challenge even figuring out where the State gains standing in this case. They weren't harmed and, not having been a party to the loans, seem to lack standing.

Maybe if I read the pleadings, it would be a little more clear, but I'm not that motivated.
 
mb227 said:
I'm still having a challenge even figuring out where the State gains standing in this case. They weren't harmed and, not having been a party to the loans, seem to lack standing.

Maybe if I read the pleadings, it would be a little more clear, but I'm not that motivated.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the standing of state courts is a matter of state law, so the normal federal constitutional "case or controversy" limitations on standing don't apply. They can simply pass a law requiring people to do something or not do something, give their AG authority to enforce the law, and they have standing in their courts. It doesn't matter if anybody actually got hurt or if they were parties to the loans.
 
Garmel said:
The whole problem with this case is that valuations of property are subjective and the government has zero business telling Trump what they are. The judge has said that Mar-a-Lago is worth 18 to 27 million while an expert Trump used said it could be worth a billion.
Click to expand...

Think about our property tax evaluations. They're subjective too, but courts still adjudicate them if there's a dispute. It's the same thing going on here. To me the big difference is that when the property tax assessor is in a dispute about property values, there's a real impact on what the state gets or doesn't get. In this case, the State of New York isn't harmed or helped either way. Even if they can legally do this, it's still an obvious pissing match.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Think about our property tax evaluations. They're subjective too, but courts still adjudicate them if there's a dispute. It's the same thing going on here. To me the big difference is that when the property tax assessor is in a dispute about property values, there's a real impact on what the state gets or doesn't get. In this case, the State of New York isn't harmed or helped either way. Even if they can legally do this, it's still an obvious pissing match.
Click to expand...

Except they're using those tax appraisals as what the property is worth in the free market. There is a difference between tax value and market value.
 
Garmel said:
Except they're using those tax appraisals as what the property is worth in the free market. There is a difference between tax value and market value.
Click to expand...

I think the NY court would at least claim that they're evaluating the property by its value in the free market too. I'm sure they'll have an appraiser ready to testify as an expert, and I'm sure Trump will too.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I think the NY court would at least claim that they're evaluating the property by its value in the free market too. I'm sure they'll have an appraiser ready to testify as an expert, and I'm sure Trump will too.
Click to expand...

Their appraiser as I said put Mar-a-Lago at between 18m and 27m which is a joke.

I'm heavy into real estate. Tax appraisal and free market prices rarely ever meet. With this crazy judge my *** and everybody else in real estate would be cooked.
 
Garmel said:
Their appraiser as I said put Mar-a-Lago at between 18m and 27m which is a joke.

I'm heavy into real estate. Tax appraisal and free market prices rarely ever meet. With this crazy judge my *** and everybody else in real estate would be cooked.
Click to expand...

I'm just explaining the process and theory. I'm sure the "expert" appraiser the AG hired is a partisan hack. They wouldn't have hired him if he wasn't. I'm sure Trump will be allowed to hire an appraiser who will contradict him, but the root problem is that the factfinder (the judge) is a partisan hack who's going to rubber stamp whatever the AG and her so-called "expert" says. It's a rigged proceeding.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Keep in mind that the standing of state courts is a matter of state law, so the normal federal constitutional "case or controversy" limitations on standing don't apply. They can simply pass a law requiring people to do something or not do something, give their AG authority to enforce the law, and they have standing in their courts. It doesn't matter if anybody actually got hurt or if they were parties to the loans.
Click to expand...

You're 100% correct. However, if this case goes before the SCOTUS I doubt this law survives.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I'm just explaining the process and theory. I'm sure the "expert" appraiser the AG hired is a partisan hack. They wouldn't have hired him if he wasn't. I'm sure Trump will be allowed to hire an appraiser who will contradict him, but the root problem is that the factfinder (the judge) is a partisan hack who's going to rubber stamp whatever the AG and her so-called "expert" says. It's a rigged proceeding.
Click to expand...
This is the problem with all of these cases - Trump will be found guilty in all of them. The SCOTUS will be the final arbitrator. He might win some/most on that level (depending on the make-up of the Court) but he will not win all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-GATORS *
Sat, Nov 9 • 11:00 AM on ABC/ESPN+/SECN

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top