Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Actually Letitia James and Judge Engoron said there was. There are no winners in NY, just losers.THE LAW SAYS THERE WAS.
I WIN
And here comes the racist sexist attacks on someone wholly uninvolved.Actually Letitia James and Judge Engoron said there was. There are no winners in NY, just losers.
View attachment 907816 We'll need to wait and see how it ends up. Fani thought she was winning too.
Note that it was still in the criminal courts and not the civil court for this case in the link....? A misdemeanor vs. A felony, but still criminal charges.It applies to asset forfeitures via civil proceedings also.
Timbs v. Indiana - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
If the lenders go belly up, does our govt through FDIC protect their customer's savings up to the limit???DS said that there was NO FRAUD moron.
If there was they would know it, because they would have been victimized, duh.
(Hint: they were the lender, they made lots of money, walked away happy)
No applicationIt applies to asset forfeitures via civil proceedings also.
Timbs v. Indiana - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
You know that $18M was a compromise between POS45 and county tax authorities, right? Or is this your attempt at comedy. If so...Mar a Lago is worth $18 million. Trump should be executed.
As proven in the EJ Carroll case, small fines like $5 million mean nothing to the billionaire Trump....he continued to defame. Only after the second jury imposed the $65 million fine, did he stop, breaking the law and stop defaming her....Clearly he is being excessively punished. Who objectively would say otherwise?
According to the palm beach tax assessor, with all the Deed restrictions Trump agreed to when he got permission to convert the family private home to a resort, Mara Lago is worth $18 to $27 million.Mar a Lago is worth $18 million. Trump should be executed.
The bathrooms are full of boxes of secrets?Have you gone door to door in NY validating this fantasy?
Do you have unbiased polling?
Then why not stop crapping on the ballroom floor?
1. So when NY passed a "law" that extended the statute of limitations so some lady could sue Trump, that was that legitimate, or political? How would you feel if republicans extended the statute of limitations so Hunter could be prosecuted for tax evasion?And here comes the racist sexist attacks on someone wholly uninvolved.
Why would one feign surprise? The Law.
The Law says what Trump did was fraud.
Nothing you've said or posted says otherwise.
Rule of Law little man. Something Republicans used to honor.
I would say that there is a lot or room to argue this one. Trump was found guilty without a trial of a quasi-crime, and there are no restraints whatsoever in the statute limiting the penalty.No application
The Eighth Amendment deals only with criminal punishment, and has no application to civil processes.
Limitation of the Clause to Criminal Punishments :: Eighth Amen…
View attachment 907849
law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-08/16-limitation-of-the-clause-t…
ANNOTATIONS
The Eighth Amendment deals only with criminal punishment, and has no application to civil processes. In holding the Amendment inapplicable to the infliction of corporal punishment upon schoolchildren for disciplinary purposes, the Court explained that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause “circumscribes the criminal process in three ways: First, it limits the kinds of punishment that can be imposed on those convicted of crimes; second, it proscribes punishment grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime; and third, it imposes substantive limits on what can be made criminal and punished as such.”298 These limitations, the Court thought, should not be extended outside the criminal process.
The fixing of punishment for crime and penalties for unlawful acts is within the police power of the state, and this Court cannot interfere with state legislation in fixing fines, or judicial action in imposing them, unless so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law. Where a state antitrust law fixed penalties at $5,000 a day, and, after the verdict is guilty for over 300 days, a defendant corporation was fined over $1,600,000, this Court will not hold that the fine is so excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law where it appears that the business was extensive and profitable during the period of violation and that the corporation has over $40,000,000 of assets and has declared dividends amounting to several hundred percent
t has contended that the fines imposed are so excessive as to constitute a taking of the defendant's property without due process of law. It is not contended in this connection that the prohibition of the Eighth Amendment to the federal Constitution against excessive fines operates to control the legislation of the states. The fixing of punishment for crime or penalties for unlawful acts against its laws is within the police power of the state. We can only interfere with such legislation and judicial action of the states enforcing it if the fines imposed are so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law.
No one was injured in this specific case, as opposed to FTX where Sam Bankman Fried defrauded investors.If the lenders go belly up, does our govt through FDIC protect their customer's savings up to the limit???
When Trump raped "that lady" was that political.1. So when NY passed a "law" that extended the statute of limitations so some lady could sue Trump, that was that legitimate, or political? How would you feel if republicans extended the statute of limitations so Hunter could be prosecuted for tax evasion?
Remember the FBI let Hunter's tax evasion slide?
2. Letitia James ran on "getting Trump", she bragged about it. Don't say she was "uninvolved". You keep saying Trump committed "fraud", so look up what "fraud" means:
A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.
No one was "injured", so no fraud was committed.
Letitia James abused the law to "get Trump" as she promised her democrat voters.
View attachment 907871 Partisan "hack" Letitia James
1. So when NY passed a "law" that extended the statute of limitations so some lady could sue Trump...
Reality?Whatever toady. The moment you use Maga or MAGAt... I know what you're about
Stomps foot:"Different, different, D I F F E R E N T!"This isn't true. The Adult Survivors Act in New York was passed in New York as a result of the "Me Too" movement which had started a few years before.
The legislation was pass in the Senate 63-0 and in the Assembly 140-3.
Those numbers mean that there was overwhelming support from BOTH DEMs and GOP for passage.
GOP legislators voted for it just like the DEMs.
WW
So let me ask you....if it is okay for Trump to exaggerate his assets on this certified to be true special assets form for the banking institutions, can ALL BUSINESSES just start fraudulently listing and excessively over valuing their properties too... on their special assets valuation form?No one was injured in this specific case, as opposed to FTX where Sam Bankman Fried defrauded investors.
See the difference?
winner winner chicken dinner!This isn't true. The Adult Survivors Act in New York was passed in New York as a result of the "Me Too" movement which had started a few years before.
The legislation was pass in the Senate 63-0 and in the Assembly 140-3.
Those numbers mean that there was overwhelming support from BOTH DEMs and GOP for passage.
GOP legislators voted for it just like the DEMs.
WW
..."For good reason, the protection against excessive fines has been a constant shield throughout Anglo-American history," Ginsburg wrote. "Exorbitant tolls undermine other constitutional liberties. Excessive fines can be used, for example, to retaliate against or chill the speech of political enemies."Regardless, I too believe the amount is excessive, but still needs to be sizeable ....like $50 million or $100 mil at most, not the $355 million.