Judge Engeron should be disbarred for judicial misconduct.

[rightwinger]

So what he will get hammered by republican's.... and would never be appointed...

Why not?

Dems run the Senate
Why should they care what Republicans think?

 

[martybegan]

Your blob was found guilty. Because he is guilty.

Show trial cum guzzling cuck admits show trial.

 

[meaner gene]

That isn't an answer. No one lost money on the deal, the government wasn't part of the deal, and the law used was only previously applied to someone convicted of fraud or found liable for fraud in a trial.

Who gets hurt in a statutory rape case?

The people of the state, that's who. Same with business fraud.

 

[Rambunctious]

Why not?

Dems run the Senate
Why should they care what Republicans think?

First of all the senate is going to flip but put that aside... he would never be appointed after this charade of his and James....
Not all elected democrats in the senate are as stricken with TDS as bad as you....

 

[rightwinger]

Show trial cum guzzling cuck admits show trial.

Show me da Money

 

[candycorn]

Show trial cum guzzling cuck admits show trial.

 

[rightwinger]

First of all the senate is going to flip but put that aside... he would never be appointed after this charade of his and James....
Not all elected democrats in the senate are as stricken with TDS as bad as you....

Dems will put him in to piss off Republicans

 

[candycorn]

That isn't an answer. No one lost money on the deal, the government wasn't part of the deal, and the law used was only previously applied to someone convicted of fraud or found liable for fraud in a trial.

That doesn’t matter, stupid.

Nobody gets hurt if you are driving drunk and haven’t (yet) mowed anyone down. But you’re still guilty if you blow a 1.0.

Speaking of blowing...how’s Trump doing...tell me later; don’t talk with your mouth full.

 

[Rambunctious]

Dems will put him in to piss off Republicans

Never will happen....

 

[martybegan]

Who gets hurt in a statutory rape case?

The people of the state, that's who. Same with business fraud.

the person raped?

The reason it's considered statutory rape is the person in question is a minor, and thus unable to give consent.

This is the dumbest legal argument I've heard.

 

[meaner gene]

Read the judgement award. It gives both a figure and an explanation.

It gives nothing. Again, why wasn't he charged criminally of in an actual civil trial for fraud?

It explains it all, ex:

Plaintiff’s expert, Michiel McCarty, testified reliably and convincingly that defendants profited by paying lower interest rates on loans from Deutsche Bank’s Private Wealth Management Division, based on fraudulent SFCs, than the interest rates they would have paid under nonrecourse loans simultaneously offered to them.

 

[martybegan]

That doesn’t matter, stupid.

Nobody gets hurt if you are driving drunk and haven’t (yet) mowed anyone down. But you’re still guilty if you blow a 1.0.

Speaking of blowing...how’s Trump doing...tell me later; don’t talk with your mouth full.

Because the law states you can't drive above a 0.06 or 0.08. You get busted for that, not for maybe running someone over.

The law used in the case was designed to recover fraudulent gains AFTER a conviction in a criminal trail or a standard civil judgement, something James skipped, and the corrupt judge allowed.

 

[martybegan]

It explains it all, ex:

Plaintiff’s expert, Michiel McCarty, testified reliably and convincingly that defendants profited by paying lower interest rates on loans from Deutsche Bank’s Private Wealth Management Division, based on fraudulent SFCs, than the interest rates they would have paid under nonrecourse loans simultaneously offered to them.

And yet no one lost money. And the Bank accepted the terms.

 

[meaner gene]

the person raped?

The reason it's considered statutory rape is the person in question is a minor, and thus unable to give consent.

This is the dumbest legal argument I've heard.

In a statutory rape case, the victim never complained. Same as saying that Deutche bank didn't complain.

 

[martybegan]

In a statutory rape case, the victim never complained. Same as saying that Deutche bank didn't complain.

They don't have a choice, because they are a minor.

Not the same thing, because all acts done in Trump's case were legal acts. Both sides valued the collateral, they agreed to a value, the loans were processed and paid, and the collateral was never needed.

 

[meaner gene]

And yet no one lost money. And the Bank accepted the terms.

No different from a statutory rape case.

The victim was O.K. with it.

So what gives the state the right to prosecute somebody for rape, without a victim?

Think about it. It's the same as business fraud. IN both cases, the victim, didn't know they were a victim.

 

[meaner gene]

They don't have a choice, because they are a minor.

Not the same thing, because all acts done in Trump's case were legal acts. Both sides valued the collateral, they agreed to a value, the loans were processed and paid, and the collateral was never needed.

Wrong. They may have been a minor, but they did make a choice, and they were fine with their decision.

But the state has an obligation to protect people, who are incapable of protecting themselves. To protect minors from being taken advantage of. No different than protecting businesses from being taken advantage of.

The minor didn't complain
Deutche bank didn't complain


See the parallels yet?

 

[martybegan]

No different from a statutory rape case.

The victim was O.K. with it.

So what gives the state the right to prosecute somebody for rape, without a victim?

Think about it. It's the same as business fraud. IN both cases, the victim, didn't know they were a victim.

Very different, because the premise of the statute is the person is a minor and unable to give consent.

Not even remotely the same.

 

[martybegan]

Wrong. They may have been a minor, but they did make a choice, and they were fine with their decision.

But the state has an obligation to protect people, who are incapable of protecting themselves. To protect minors from being taken advantage of. No different than protecting businesses from being taken advantage of.

The minor didn't complain
Deutche bank didn't complain


See the parallels yet?

They don't have a legal choice because they are a minor. That doesn't apply to these two sides in a consented contract.

A bank isn't an underage rape victim.

 

[Man With A Plan]

New York state was defrauded by Trumps fraudulent business records.

New York State wasn't even a part of the deal! The banks and Trump were. The banks got paid. They're ready to do more deals with Trump. So explain how the State was defrauded by a deal in which there were no victims?