New York Judgment Against Trump Violates the Eighth Amendment

I can see you've never come near a CPLR.

The 6th amendment (right to jury trial) is ONLY for criminal trials.
And the right to jury trial under common law, doesn't extend to trials of equity.

A court of equity, also known as an equity court or chancery court, is a court authorized to apply principles of equity rather than principles of law to cases brought before it.

Hence no constitutional rights were violated.
I never invoked the 6th amendment. I recognize the copy/paste and I know that's the justification the judge uses.

But it's a crock of shit. If this is the way the law was meant to be used it's unconstitutional. Everyone is entitled to due process.

You can't just deem someone guilty of a non-crime and have an unrestricted right to take their property.
 
Trump was the one who committed a crime, actually several dozen crimes of fraud.
tumblr_3d91f42ca09fdccb065ef4ae99a10c33_e31d3a35_2048.jpg
 
I never invoked the 6th amendment. I recognize the copy/paste and I know that's the justification the judge uses.

But it's a crock of shit. If this is the way the law was meant to be used it's unconstitutional. Everyone is entitled to due process.

You can't just deem someone guilty of a non-crime and have an unrestricted right to take their property.


Bastiat spoke about this ~200 years ago. It is using the courts to commit a crime.
 
I never invoked the 6th amendment. I recognize the copy/paste and I know that's the justification the judge uses.

But it's a crock of shit. If this is the way the law was meant to be used it's unconstitutional. Everyone is entitled to due process.

You can't just deem someone guilty of a non-crime and have an unrestricted right to take their property.
Actually it was making them disgorge their stolen property.

No different than if they stole the Mona Lisa, and were forced to give back a $20 million painting.
 
There was no crime alleged in this matter. If there had been, the dopey NY AG would have charged Trump criminally.
Trump was protected by presidential immunity until the statute of limitations ran out, hence there were no criminal charges.
 
Trump was the one who committed a crime, actually several dozen crimes of fraud.
No, he was not charged with a crime, this was a civil action. The judge even admitted that. The definition of civil fraud is extremely broad and it encompasses much more than the crime of fraud under common law.

The judge acknowledged the criminal elements were not there- he just said it doesn't matter, the statute does not require them.
 
No, he was not charged with a crime, this was a civil action.



Trump Organization found guilty on all counts of criminal tax fraud

A Manhattan jury has found two Trump Organization companies guilty on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records connected to a 15-year scheme to defraud tax authorities by failing to report and pay taxes on compensation for top executives.
 
Actually it was making them disgorge their stolen property.

No different than if they stole the Mona Lisa, and were forced to give back a $20 million painting.
BS. There was nothing stolen, everyone made money and the contracts were fulfilled.

The money goes to the State Treasury. Nobody is reimbursed because nobody lost anything.
 
BS. There was nothing stolen, everyone made money and the contracts were fulfilled.
This is akin to somebody going to a restaurant pretending they're a famous person, like a politician or movie star. The restaurant is happy for the publicity it would bring, and comps the guy a $100 meal. He tips the staff $20, and everybody walks away happy.
The restaurant posts their picture, and customers come in to see the picture.
All is well.

Until somebody points out the guy in the picture wasn't who they said it was, and then everybody realizes they were robbed. But they were happy as a clam up until the fraud was discovered.
 

Trump Organization found guilty on all counts of criminal tax fraud

A Manhattan jury has found two Trump Organization companies guilty on multiple charges of criminal tax fraud and falsifying business records connected to a 15-year scheme to defraud tax authorities by failing to report and pay taxes on compensation for top executives.
Trump was never charged in that case either. That was about executive perks, big deal.

How about we make politicians claim their lavish trips and personal spending from their campaign funds as income? Give them the same treatment...
 
This is akin to somebody going to a restaurant pretending they're a famous person, like a politician or movie star. The restaurant is happy for the publicity it would bring, and comps the guy a $100 meal. He tips the staff $20, and everybody walks away happy.
The restaurant posts their picture, and customers come in to see the picture.
All is well.

Until somebody points out the guy in the picture wasn't who they said it was, and then everybody realizes they were robbed. But they were happy as a clam up until the fraud was discovered.
Well then the restaurant has recourse. They can complain to the district attorney, and if he thinks there is a criminal action, he can charge the guy with a crime.

If he says there is no criminal charge to be had, the restaurant can bring a civil suit against the guy for the money they think they are owed.

In both cases, the defendant receives due process and retains right to appeal.
 
Let's do a pop quiz. Everybody defending Trumps actions with his bank loans.

What's your position on the Hunter Biden gun charge. Nobody got hurt, his girlfriend took the gun away from him.
So no harm, no foul?

Prove me wrong.
 
Well then the restaurant has recourse. They can complain to the district attorney, and if he thinks there is a criminal action, he can charge the guy with a crime.

If he says there is no criminal charge to be had, the restaurant can bring a civil suit against the guy for the money they think they are owed.
The guy can claim the restaurant owner failed to do "due diligence" He mistook the guy for a celebrity, and he should have asked him for ID, but failed to. Besides, until somebody pointed out the picture, he didn't complain.

Right?
 
Last edited:
Let's do a pop quiz. Everybody defending Trumps actions with his bank loans.

What's your position on the Hunter Biden gun charge. Nobody got hurt, his girlfriend took the gun away from him.
So no harm, no foul?

Prove me wrong.
Hunter is charged with a felony crime. If he is found guilty he will be sentenced according to the guidelines (in theory, of course).

He will receive due process and retain the right to appeal.
 
Hunter is charged with a felony crime. If he is found guilty he will be sentenced according to the guidelines (in theory, of course).

He will receive due process and retain the right to appeal.
It was a victimless crime.
It was a process crime.
Nobody was hurt.
And his girlfriend already took the gun away.

What's the point of charging him with anything?
It's a political prosecution.
 

Forum List

Back
Top