Lutecia James won’t stop her vendetta against Trump

[Lisa558]

Isn’t there a pending investigation into James’s mortgage? Seems very malicious if charges ever come out of it.

(Not sure what “lost income” comes from a fine he never had to pay)

He had to put up a good amount of it.

 

[struth]

Isn’t there a pending investigation into James’s mortgage? Seems very malicious if charges ever come out of it.

(Not sure what “lost income” comes from a fine he never had to pay)

She is, yes when you commit mortgage fraud expect the govt to prosecute you

 

[Lisa558]

Isn’t there a pending investigation into James’s mortgage? Seems very malicious if charges ever come out of it.

(Not sure what “lost income” comes from a fine he never had to pay)

And what’s malicious about charging the Attorney General when she committed blatant mortgage fraud?

 

[Marener]

He had to put up a good amount of it.

How much? Doesn’t he get it back?

 

[Lisa558]

How much? Doesn’t he get it back?

Yes, he gets it back. But what about all the lost income on it?

 

[Marener]

And what’s malicious about charging the Attorney General when she committed blatant mortgage fraud?

The fact that it happens a lot and it’s not prosecuted. Ken Paxton did worse and we both know he has nothing to worry about.

What Trump did was blatant fraud, but you think it’s malicious to go after him.

 

[Marener]

Yes, he gets it back. But what about all the lost income on it?

I doubt there’s any recourse. People who put up bonds don’t get compensation for “lost income” even if they’re acquitted. Do that?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Delusional. The presence or absence of a mansion it is not subjective. It is not debatable. Either is their or it isn’t.

Sounds like Deutsche Bank has some openings in the appraisal department.

When is your interview?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And you don’t think James could claim the same thing about Trump?

Would that be the pot calling the kettle black?

 

[Marener]

Would that be the pot calling the kettle black?

It already is.

Trump’s DoJ is about the most openly malicious department we’ve ever seen.

And they don’t even seem to care, they know nothing will ever happen to them no matter what they do. In fact, their only chance to advance is to be blatantly loyal to the president and partisan above all else

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It already is.

Trump’s DoJ is about the most openly malicious department we’ve ever seen.

And they don’t even seem to care, they know nothing will ever happen to them no matter what they do. In fact, their only chance to advance is to be blatantly loyal to the president and partisan above all else

Geez, lawfare is awful, isn't it?

 

[Marener]

Geez, lawfare is awful, isn't it?

Right wing criminals have been claiming lawfare as a means to exculpate their own crimes.

Hacks like you can’t tell the difference.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Right wing criminals have been claiming lawfare as a means to exculpate their own crimes.

Hacks like you can’t tell the difference.

 

[Marener]

See, this is how we know you don’t actually care about the country or its values.

All you guys care about anymore is “winning”.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

See, this is how we know you don’t actually care about the country or its values.

All you guys care about anymore is “winning”.

 

[Marener]

You’re no patriot. You’re a hack.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You’re no patriot. You’re a hack.

 

[Lisa558]

The fact that it happens a lot and it’s not prosecuted. Ken Paxton did worse and we both know he has nothing to worry about.

What Trump did was blatant fraud, but you think it’s malicious to go after him.

Who else was prosecuted under the same circumstances, and had a similar financial penalty?

The fact that James campaigned on “getting” the Democrats’ #1 rival, and after combing through all sorts of records to come up with a victimless “crime” (one where then”victim” wanted to do it again!) shows how little she had on him.

A big nothingburger, which is why the Appeals Court overturned it.

 

[Marener]

Who else was prosecuted under the same circumstances, and had a similar financial penalty?

The fact that James campaigned on “getting” the Democrats’ #1 rival, and after combing through all sorts of records to come up with a victimless “crime” (one where then”victim” wanted to do it again!) shows how little she had on him.

A big nothingburger, which is why the Appeals Court overturned it.

What’s wrong with campaigning on “getting” someone? Trump did it to Clinton in 2016 and none of you thought that was at all inappropriate.

Now Trump is using the government to go after anyone who criticized him at all. People like James, Schiff, even a Fed reserve governor who never did anything other than vote against a rate cut.

 

[Winston]

From your NBC link: A bond for that amount was posted Monday night, underwritten by Hankey's Knight Specialty Insurance Co. Hankey said the bond was fully collateralized by cash from Trump's company. "It was a good experience," Hankey said.

From your Google link:

• Premium: The annual premium for a fully cash-collateralized bond is the low percentage fee charged by the surety for issuing and managing the bond. This covers administrative and underwriting costs, with the rate based on the reduced risk to the surety.
• Collateral: The collateral is the full cash amount of the bond, which you deposit with the surety and which is returned to you once the bond is exonerated (or canceled).

Trump put the full 175 million up for the surety bond. So 175 million of his dollars has NOT been earning interest and not available to him since Engoran's original outrageous bond got slapped down the first time.

So Trump not only lost the premium, he lost the use of 175 million because of Engoran's giant over reach.

Anyone not seeing Engoran as a hack has no idea what the law is or is a partisan hack, too.

You should have read the AI link I also left. Trump was paid interest on the cash he put up, all cash collateral for surety bonds are paid market interest LESS the premium for the bond. Which is why Trump took out the bond in the first place. He could have just placed the cash with the State but then he wouldn't have been paid interest. I mean if he was going to lose interest on the money why would he pay a premium?