Panicked New York Governor Tells Businesses “They Have Nothing to Fear” After Democrat Leaders Fleece Donald Trump of $355 Million

[forkup]

Trump hating AP reviewed all 70 years of cases under this statute, and James' use of this statute was unprecedented.

Dissolving Trump's business empire would stand apart in history of NY fraud law

AP’s review of nearly 150 cases since New York’s “repeated fraud” statute was passed showed that nearly every previous time a company was taken away, victims and losses were key factors.

apnews.com

Read your own article.

An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.

It's not the first big business to be charged under the statute. In fact, it's not even the first time Trump has run afoul of the statute. The only thing unprecedent would have been the dissolvement of the whole company without a showing of victims or major losses. (lost interest amount to major losses but fine).

The point is the punishment didn't make it in the ruling. So what's your point of contention?

 

[Rawley]

So what's your point of contention?

Uh, that the use of this 70 year old statue against Trump is unprecedented.

Are you having trouble understanding "unprecedented?"

 

[forkup]

Uh, that the use of this 70 year old statue against Trump is unprecedented.

Are you having trouble understanding "unprecedented?"

No, I have a problem with the term unprecedented when there's nothing unprecedented about the judgement.

If the dissolvement of the Trump organization would have been a punishment in the judgement, you can use that term. It didn't, so you can't.

 

[Rawley]

No, I have a problem with the term unprecedented when there's nothing unprecedented about the judgement.

If the dissolvement of the Trump organization would have been a punishment in the judgement, you can use that term. It didn't, so you can't.

??? The judgement is unprecedented

 

[forkup]

??? The judgement is unprecedented

It isn't, not even close. Again read your own article.

 

[Rawley]

It isn't, not even close. Again read your own article.

I did.

Third and last time, you can stamp your feet all you want, but it doesn't change the objective fact the judgement is unprecedented.

 

[Oldestyle]

Why do you need to see others? The law is the law and it is either followed or broken. Right?

If you're in a line of traffic where everyone else is doing ten miles over the speed limit, the same as you are and a police officer who doesn't like you pulls you over and writes you a ticket while ignoring every other car that flies by...do you think "the law is the law" in that scenario?

 

[Slade3200]

If you're in a line of traffic where everyone else is doing ten miles over the speed limit, the same as you are and a police officer who doesn't like you pulls you over and writes you a ticket while ignoring every other car that flies by...do you think "the law is the law" in that scenario?

I wouldn’t be happy about it but the cop would have every right to give me a ticket… especially if I was the one car that honked my horn and flipped off the cop as I drove by

 

[Oldestyle]

I wouldn’t be happy about it but the cop would have every right to give me a ticket… especially if I was the one car that honked my horn and flipped off the cop as I drove by

That's called selective prosecution, Slade...it's illegal!

Now let's say you show up at court to fight this bogus ticket and it turns out that the presiding judge also hates your guts! Rather than tearing up the ticket as he should...this judge decides to fine you $10,000 and suspend your license for three years!

That in essence is what has happened to Donald Trump in New York.

 

[AZrailwhale]

If you're a CEO of ANY corporation, you should be making sure all of your workers are well paid.

No I would not want to do business in Texas where women can't get proper health care, the electrical grid is failing, and the Governor is a right wing loony. I would not want to do business in ANY red state.

I want to live and work where people are well paid and have FREEDOM. Not everything is about MONEY!

You’d be fired by the Board of Directors is a week. Businesses exist to make money. They do that by producing a quality product at rock bottom prices, and selling it for as much as the market will bear. You pay enough to attract quality people, but not a cent more. As a CEO you don’t want your employees to be paid well, you want them be be paid enough to stay with you and not go to a competitor.

 

[Slade3200]

That's called selective prosecution, Slade...it's illegal!

It’s called prosecutorial discretion and it’s how it works. Can’t prosecute everybody

 

[Slade3200]

Now let's say you show up at court to fight this bogus ticket and it turns out that the presiding judge also hates your guts! Rather than tearing up the ticket as he should...this judge decides to fine you $10,000 and suspend your license for three years!

That in essence is what has happened to Donald Trump in New York.

Now you’ve fallen off track. The law dictates maximum penalties for offenses. Donny was given a calculated penalty based on the crime… return the profits gained.

 

[Oldestyle]

Now you’ve fallen off track. The law dictates maximum penalties for offenses. Donny was given a calculated penalty based on the crime… return the profits gained.

Where does the "law" dictate a "maximum" penalty for a supposed offense that had no victim? What gives that judge the right to impose a penalty that severe? Because he hates Trump? There was no calculation here that makes any sense at all because there was never a case that made any sense at all. This was a political hit job by Democrats against their main political opponent. The next time you sanctimonious assholes start whining about "DEMOCRACY" being at risk? Just remember what it is that you're doing right now! The biggest danger to democracy isn't conservatives...it's you liberals with your "the end justifies the means" approach to governing!

 

[Oldestyle]

It’s called prosecutorial discretion and it’s how it works. Can’t prosecute everybody

When you only prosecute your enemies and let your friends skate it's called CORRUPTION!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Not really. But if you state one value for tax purposes and one value for loan purposes you are committing fraud. If you don't know the difference between 10000 square feet and 30000 square feet you're committing fraud. It's funny that the responsibility for keeping proper records apparently isn't on the business for some reason but on the people doing business with that business. Seems to me a whole lot of fraud isn't a crime anymore under that reasoning.

So you’re committing fraud when you show you have millions of more voters than actually do, right?

 

[forkup]

So you’re committing fraud when you show you have millions of more voters than actually do, right?

Can you please rephrase whatever this is? Because I honestly don't know what you're asking.

 

[Mac1958]

It’s called prosecutorial discretion and it’s how it works. Can’t prosecute everybody

You always go after the biggest fish. Always. Then you hope it sets an example.

This "everybody does it" bullshit is a lie. These people used to care about law. Now it's only an impedence for them.

 

[forkup]

I did.

Third and last time, you can stamp your feet all you want, but it doesn't change the objective fact the judgement is unprecedented.

I think I can go on more time. I'll walk you through the sentence.

Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.

I will assume, just to streamline there's no obvious victims or major losses. Not that I think this is true but for the sake of argument.


What does that sentence say and doesn't say.

-It doesn't say it's the only big business that was ever threatened with being shut down. It qualifies it with, "without a showing of major losses or obvious victims.'
-It doesn't say it's the only business being threatened with closure without a showing of obvious victims or major losses. It qualifies that with the words " big business."
-So neither the threat of being shut down is unprecedented or the idea that a major company was threatened with being shut down.

-The only thing that's unprecedented about this, according to the article YOU provided. Is the threat of closure without a showing of major losses and victims.

Since the Trump organization didn't get shut down in the judgement the whole point is moot anyway.


When you read something it is important to grasp both the explicit and implicit meaning.

 

[forkup]

When you only prosecute your enemies and let your friends skate it's called CORRUPTION!

Good then. Hunter Biden is facing multiple felonies. There goes that argument.

 

[Slade3200]

Where does the "law" dictate a "maximum" penalty for a supposed offense that had no victim? What gives that judge the right to impose a penalty that severe? Because he hates Trump? There was no calculation here that makes any sense at all because there was never a case that made any sense at all. This was a political hit job by Democrats against their main political opponent. The next time you sanctimonious assholes start whining about "DEMOCRACY" being at risk? Just remember what it is that you're doing right now! The biggest danger to democracy isn't conservatives...it's you liberals with your "the end justifies the means" approach to governing!

How is paying back the profits he made from the fraud that severe?