Jump to content

Lock her up! Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, augustus said:

It's all nonsense

Precisely.  I'm guessing that's why Trump's lawyers had already offered a settlement that James turned down.

It's almost like a metaphor for our times, and MAGA.

Smart Black female prosecutor who is tough.

Boorish White male grifter type who gets bad legal advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“It’s nothing but a fishing expedition” 
Ah yes, but many people who fish actually catch fish.
 
"It's a witch hunt."
Witches are not crooks like Trump. Stop demeaning witches. 
 
"Both sides do it."
If so, than both sides deserve to be tried and convicted. (BTW, Durham came and went.)
 
"The Dems are weaponizing justice."
If by "weaponizing" you mean "delivering," we agree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BnaC said:

All the tete a tete notwithstanding, I’m still trying to understand how the AG advances a charge on a civil matter without the grievance of an injured party.  Do any of our lawyers have insight?  @bigjoey?

The AG of New York can bring a civil fraud lawsuit on behalf of the state. If you bothered to look at state law and  the actual document, you'd know that. 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW 
YORK
-against-
THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION, INC.; 
DJT HOLDINGS LLC; DJT 
HOLDINGS MANAGING MEMBER 
LLC; SEVEN SPRINGS LLC; ERIC 
TRUMP; CHARLES MARTABANO; 
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP; 
SHERI DILLON; MAZARS USA LLC; 
DONALD J. TRUMP; DONALD 
TRUMP, JR.; and IVANKA TRUMP

This conduct was in violation of New York Executive Law 63(12), which gives the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) special and broad powers to go after persistent and repeated fraud and illegality, which in this case includes violating other state laws prohibiting the submission of false financial statements, the falsification of business records, and the commission of insurance fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, TylerInTexas said:

Think back 6 years ago. We could have avoided this stain on American history and possibly the future downfall of democracy by requiring presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns. An ounce of prevention...its that easy.

Tax returns don't reveal everything. In fact a team of good accountants are hired by most businesses to legitimize every transaction. Were tax returns a more accurate crystal ball into someone's true business activity, Hillary Clinton would likewise have been excluded from running...so YES we could have avoided the stain either of these people would have made on history.  Only Hillary and her reputation of corruption and hypocrisy could have lost to someone as ridiculous as Donald Trump. It's a good guess, that Bernie's tax records are simple, and would have passed any test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am tired of investigations, summons, leaks, etc on Trumper

Let's get it over with.  A fair and speedy trial in front of his peers will be the result.

Hinckley had a fair trial, cops that murdered George Floyd had a fair trial, OK City bombers had a fair trial, Rittenhouse had a fair trial 

I would like to feel that Bin Laden would have had a fair trial

Maybe Garland wants to get his ducks in a row

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:

The AG of New York can bring a civil fraud lawsuit on behalf of the state. If you bothered to look at state law and  the actual document, you'd know that. 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW 
YORK
-against-
THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION, INC.; 
DJT HOLDINGS LLC; DJT 
HOLDINGS MANAGING MEMBER 
LLC; SEVEN SPRINGS LLC; ERIC 
TRUMP; CHARLES MARTABANO; 
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP; 
SHERI DILLON; MAZARS USA LLC; 
DONALD J. TRUMP; DONALD 
TRUMP, JR.; and IVANKA TRUMP

This conduct was in violation of New York Executive Law 63(12), which gives the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) special and broad powers to go after persistent and repeated fraud and illegality, which in this case includes violating other state laws prohibiting the submission of false financial statements, the falsification of business records, and the commission of insurance fraud.

Based on that response, I don’t think you understand - valuation of commercial real estate enterprises is inherently imprecise and beauty is often in the eye of the beholder….but if you have one shred of insight into who was actually harmed here, I’m all ears…is it fraud if the counterparty knows better and doesn’t rely on allegedly questionable values?

Edited by BnaC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BnaC said:

Based on that response, I don’t think you understand... 

Based on your response, I don’t think you understand the broad nature of the alleged violations  It's not simply about real estate valuation. 😘

Falsification of business records in violation of Penal Law § 175.10;

Issuing a false financial statement in violation of Penal Law § 175.45;

Engaging in insurance fraud by submitting false and misleading information in a written application for insurance and to obtain other insurance benefits in violation of Penal Law § 176.05;

Engaging in a conspiracy to commit each of aforementioned state law violations.

The conduct alleged in this complaint also violates federal criminal law, including issuing false statements to financial institutions and bank fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their whole case is the value of property after Trump Inc. invested and improved the land, should have been the "potential value" of the undeveloped property. It's a gimmick case that will go nowhere with any legitimate judge.

But the left-wing, fake news media will falsely report he was "indicted" for years to come and conveniently "forget" to tell their ignorant patrons that the case was dismissed.

This is 100% political led by a low IQ AG.
Indeed The SWAMP he tried to drain, wants to make sure he is gone forever! Bozo lived in NYC and knew a lot about Trump. He did indeed do many great things for NYC. He helped to bail it out from bankruptcy (along with a business consortium). He turned the old Commodore hotel into the beautiful Grand Central Trump Tower (reinvigorating the entire area and convincing business to come back to the city). He convinced city fathers to NOT build this nightmare bridge or some such on the West side - having it as an underground tunnel and parks and beautiful public spaces on top (near the water).
And of course no New Yorker can forget the Wollman ice skating rink that had to be shut down because the city couldn't afford the needed repairs. Mayor Koch turned it over to Donald Trump, who did a total renovation in 6 months at his own expense.

~ BoZo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just read the 29 page decision and order and it is a model of legal clarity, brevity and logic. With two (count 'em, 2) of the three deciding 11th Circuit judges Trump appointees. A brutal smackdown of the lower court. Happens when one side comes in with sworn affidavits and the other side comes in with nothing. Whew. Yesterday was a bad  day all around for Donnie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TylerInTexas said:

Just read the 29 page decision and order and it is a model of legal clarity, brevity and logic. With two (count 'em, 2) of the three deciding 11th Circuit judges Trump appointees. A brutal smackdown of the lower court. Happens when one side comes in with sworn affidavits and the other side comes in with nothing. Whew. Yesterday was a bad  day all around for Donnie.

WRONG THREAD!

This thread is about the AG charging Trump in NY state.  NOT the seizure of the Mar-A-Lago documents.....

Whew. Today is a bad day all around for @TylerInTexas.

~ BoZo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, augustus said:

She's onto nothing.  You dems have been onto something with Trump for 6 years and it all falls apart ha ha ha ha ha.   It's just pathetic.  Like the dems giving Trump backed candidates $40 million this year.  How pitiful.  

 

18 hours ago, augustus said:

According to news reports, Trump repaid all his lenders or is current on his debts.  So what damages occurred??   The dems are an evil bunch.  

 

14 hours ago, BnaC said:

This particular issue is a headline grab so this particular state official can feel like they’ve done something to earn street cred 

That makes her not much different than the Viking man from Jan 6’s tour of the capitol 

Cartoon: The infection

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BOZO T CLOWN said:

Their whole case is the value of property after Trump Inc. invested and improved the land, should have been the "potential value" of the undeveloped property. It's a gimmick case that will go nowhere with any legitimate judge.

I've followed your judgments on these matters for years, mon amour.    And I take them seriously.  It may be my own bias, since you simply look and sound so distinguished.

But I also consider the results.  You were all in for Trump in 2016.  He lost by about 3 million votes.  Would never have been President, but for an institution most Americans don't want that was built on the need for slavery.  Blame that on Black women, too, I guess. 

You were all in for Trump in 2020.  This time even the institution built on slavery and the Jubilant Patriotic Cop Beating couldn't keep him from losing.  But you gotta give credit to Powell, The Pillow Guy and Ghouliani.  They sure tried.

Meanwhile, you lost the House in 2018 and the Senate in 2020.  Oops.

As of today, the polls show Democrats up by 1.3 %, in an election we should be behind in.  Unless we use MAGAmatics.  Trafalgar shows Republicans up by 6.  But Trafalgar was wrong in almost every close state their polls showed Trump would win in in 2020.  Frankly, the judges haven't given much weight to MAGAsprudence, either.  if we base our judgment on all the Bozo election fraud arguments that got thrown out.

So the conclusion I have to reach, objectively, is this. When Trump follows the political and legal advice of clowns, he usually loses.

Hope I'm wrong, though.  So far your track record is perfect.

But if I'm right, at least you belong to a great circus!

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BOZO T CLOWN said:

WRONG THREAD!

This thread is about the AG charging Trump in NY state.  NOT the seizure of the Mar-A-Lago documents.....

Whew. Today is a bad day all around for @TylerInTexas.

~ BoZo

 

I'm not sure this is true.  Although most of the posts have been about the NY AG's civil suit against Trump, the title of the thread. - Lock her up!  Lock him up!...- clearly refers to possible criminal behavior.   Perhaps the OP can weigh in on this.  What think you @stevenkesslar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:

Based on your response, I don’t think you understand the broad nature of the alleged violations  It's not simply about real estate valuation. 😘

Falsification of business records in violation of Penal Law § 175.10;

Ok, let's go with that and investigate the first one:

  • § 175.10 Falsifying business records in the first degree. A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof. Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony.

As I read this, to be "guilty" there is an "and" which includes "intent" to "commit another crime".   

Hmmmm, I think I understand just fine.   

Based on the actual code, there's more to making this case than simply one dimension...and proving guilt will likely require more than just an assertion from an AG intent on getting her 15 minutes of fame.   If I recall, she RAN on the platform of pinning something on him...her conclusion was set before she was elected AG and she's made her desire to go on to be governor clear, hasn't she?  Frankly, the only thing about her that impresses me is that she went to Howard...

So, if you actually have some insight, I'm all ears...but based on this start, I'm guessing you don't.

 

4 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:

Looking at the actual charges is better than making guesses. Do try to keep up! 

Looking at the actual law is useful - Do try to keep up!

Edited by BnaC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pitman said:

I'm not sure this is true.  Although most of the posts have been about the NY AG's civil suit against Trump, the title of the thread. - Lock her up!  Lock him up!...- clearly refers to possible criminal behavior.   Perhaps the OP can weigh in on this.  What think you @stevenkesslar?

First, I plead guilty.  I am aware of the fact that I like to go down interesting side paths when I travel - both in reality, and intellectually.  It has its payoffs.  Traveling through Europe with my sister was always a blast because she loves spontaneity and just going off in unexpected directions.

But back to the point, and to answer your question more directly.   😉  My intent was to focus on the overall criminality of the Trump family.  Which is deep, vast, and broad. So, at least in my eyes,  Mar A Lago and inciting the Jubilant Patriotic Cop Beating and keeping top secrets in his closet are all examples of clownish and at least potentially criminal behavior.  That said, mon amour Bozo is correct in pointing out that some of these are civil matters, with criminal referrals. 

I basically just think Trump is a liar and a crook.  As with many crooks with lots of lawyers, the question is really whether he can be caught.

Since you asked, I'll make a comparison that I find interesting.  And flattering of the collective wisdom of Americans.  During much of Trump's Presidency, when Russiagate was swirling around, no more than about 1 in 3 Independents favored impeaching Trump. That changed when it became clear he tried to blackmail Ukraine's security to get dirt on Biden.  On a bad day for Trump, after Ukrainegate broke, the percentage of Independents who favored impeaching him was in the high 40's.  It took inciting a riot based on a BIG LIE about a stolen election to get past the 50 % threshold with Independents.  And then only barely.  Right after Jan. 11, 2021 support for impeaching Trump jumped to about 50.3 % among Independents.

So It's significant that now about 60 % of Independents think Trump should face criminal charges.  An even higher percentage of Independents - 2 in 3 - think he should not run again.

So I think that's a substantive answer to your question, @pitman.   My sense is that Americans, especially Independents, are trying to be fair and thoughtful.  They gave Trump lots of slack.  He used it as rope.  And he did hang himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, BnaC said:

As I read this, to be "guilty" there is an "and" which includes "intent" to "commit another crime".   

Hmmmm, I think I understand just fine.   

Based on the actual code, there's more to making this case than simply one dimension. And proving guilt will likely require more than just an assertion from an AG intent on getting her 15 minutes of fame... 

Who is contending that Attorney General Letitia James merely needs to assert a charge to get a guilty verdict? Nobody, from what I've seen here. You're really grasping at straws now. Triggered much? 

Absolutely nothing you just wrote makes a difference to the actual lawsuit and its claims. Everyone realizes there's more than "simply one dimension." In due course, we'll all find out more about the fraudulent actions. And Drumpf pleading the fifth in civil depositions is going to present serious problems for his team down the road. . 

I'm stocking up on popcorn and butter!  

Edited by Marc in Calif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Marc in Calif said:

Who is contending that Attorney General Letitia James merely needs to assert a charge to get a guilty verdict? Nobody, from what I've seen here. You're really grasping at straws now. Triggered much? 

Well, actually, it’s you.  You simply named the penal code cited….you didn’t read it, did you?   You didn’t know it’s more than just opening a file and looking at a piece of paper and that intent relating to compound crimes needed to be proved, did you?

Your debate style is uncivil and will probably just embarrass you.  Why don’t let us know what your last username was on this forum before you were banned or checked out to remake yourself…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/21/2022 at 5:54 PM, BOZO T CLOWN said:

She is accusing them of overvaluating, not undervaluating. Her insane accusation ignores the fact that banks do their own evaluations before lending money.

~ BoZo

This statement is partially correct.  Retired banker sam.fitzpatrick agrees that banks do their own evaluations of real estate, but that is specific to when the real estate in question is part of the lending transaction itself as the purpose of the loan (such as to buy or renovate the property), the source of repayment for the loan (such as rental income), or the collateral of the loan. 

However, when evaluating the net value of other assets included on either the businesses or personal financial statement provided in a transaction not related to the specific real estate pledged in the transaction, separate evaluations are not often conducted, as there is an expense to the borrower for such independent appraisals.  

It is doubtful that the overvaluations appeared on financial statements audited or reviewed by CPAs independent of the Trump Organization.  If they were, the CPAs would be following GAAP and would list the real estate at the lower of its acquisition cost or appraised value.   Based on rising real estate values during the period in question in the lawsuit, it is doubtful that values were declining.  If they were not following GAAP, then the CPA would be required to disclose the non-traditional accounting treatment and that would be a red flag for the banks.   If the opinion letter the CPA stated that GAAP was followed, the bank would have limited need to request that independent appraisal of the property. 

An example from AG James press conference (sam.fitzpatrick's apologies for not finding the exact quote from the AG) was that vacant land was overvalued by stating that it could be developed, but the property was not zoned for the indicated development.  As such, the land's actual value would not be as high as indicated on the submitted financial statements.   As mentioned earlier, unless the property was the purpose or collateral for the transaction, the bank would not have done an independent valuation, but considered its value as a part of the net worth of either the Trump Organization or the individual(s) that listed it as part of the bank's evaluation of the overall financial worthiness to borrow or provide a guaranty on the borrowed amount.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BOZO T CLOWN said:

Their whole case is the value of property after Trump Inc. invested and improved the land, should have been the "potential value" of the undeveloped property.

The Generally Accepted Accounting Practice is that such property be listed at the purchase price and the cost of the improvements, not a current market value (unless those assets have devalued.)  The AG's assertion is that the reported values exceeded the parameters GAAP permits.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BnaC said:

Looking at the actual law is useful - Do try to keep up!

I do find it interesting that so many conservatives are willing to go down these Alice In Wonderland rabbit holes.  And inform us about how Trump is right and everybody else is wrong.  It sounds similar to the rabbit holes about how, precisely, the 2020 election was stolen.  And why, precisely, the Jubilant Patriotic Cop Beating was not a riotous insurrection. 

But it also turns out that, at the end of the day, the law is the law.  So the Jubilant Patriotic Cop Beaters are mostly headed to jail, it turns out.  Stay tuned for whether Trump will be joining them.

Most of us are not lawyers.  And most of us know we are not lawyers.  It's not clear to me that Trump knows he is not a lawyer.  Or even that he knows how to get good legal advice.  Except from people like Bill Barr and Pat Cipollone, who we now know basically told the clown lawyers to go fuck themselves and get out of the Oval.  RINOs!

Gloria Steinem on her Bill Clinton essay: 'I wouldn’t write the same thing now'

Since there is so much rationalization of Trump's alleged crimes going on, I thought that might be worth throwing in the pot for context. 

Back when I still wanted to talk to conservative friends who would defend Trump, I always thought one of their best arguments was to posit Clinton whataboutism as a form of original sin.  As in:  "But everybody defended Bill Clinton for being a predator."  Trump of course used the same argument himself in 2016 to deflect from his own predatory behavior.  Now, irony of ironies, the same people who chanted "Lock Her Up!" are using a different form of Clinton whataboutism to justify their belief that Trump shouldn't be held accountable.  And is actually being harassed and publicly humiliated by the FBI.  Despite my own tendency for intellectual diversion, I simply can't follow the logic of how we got from "Lock Her Up!" to "Defund the FBI." 

Steinem points to something that does bode well for Trump, I think.  You can get away with things for a long time when your name starts with POTUS or ex-POTUS.  Maybe an entire lifetime.

What I think you may be missing, @BnaC, is that what matters most here is the court of public opinion.  Not the court of law.

And Bill Clinton is as close an example as Democrats have to Trump.  Even before he was elected, there were all kinds of allegations swirling around.  So you can argue it either way.  He did get elected POTUS twice.  That said, I'd argue it took a toll.  All the whataboutism about Bill, and the second coming of Comey in October 2016, sure didn't help Hillary.  And in saying that, I am saying that it had an impact precisely because, whether they were prosecuted or not, most people felt these allegations had some foundation in fact.  Both with Bill's predatory bad habits, and Hillary's sloppiness with government documents. 

So I don't think this should be  giving the Trump Party good feelings about MAGA, Again!  in 2024.  Whether Trump is prosecuted or not.

To perhaps go further off topic in my own thread, I'll throw in Alan Lichtman.  Since I think all the "Lock Him Up!" stuff is about the 2024 election. 

In his Keys to the Presidency, Lichtman argues, I think convincingly, that Monicagate was a contributing factor to Gore's loss in 2020. Lichtman predicted Gore would win the popular vote, which he did.  But said it would be very close, citing his "scandal" key as one of the things that would hurt Gore by association.  I can't find them anymore.  But Lichtman cites 2000 polls I fact checked that show a very solid minority of voters cited a "return to moral order" or something like that as a reason to vote for W.  Rove himself has admitted that the revelations of W.'s drunk driving threatened his election by puncturing that image.   Those were the days!  Driving drunk was a potential deal breaker.  Not hanging Mike Pence and trying to steal an election..  

Lichtman did cite his "scandal" key as one of the ones that decisively turned against Trump in 2020, as well as his two economy keys.   He said Russiagate and swirling rumors didn't count.  An impeachment that a majority of Americans believed had merit was a whole different matter.  Lichtman also argued it could be a close and controversial election, in part because he predicted Trump might try to steal it.

So if Trump is nominated in 2024, which at this point seems like the most likely scenario, it is going to be interesting.  Lichtman's system has correctly predicted every race since 1984 because he is good at sticking to the facts.  And using big things like the economy and war and "scandal" to predict outcomes based on how the same "keys" worked in the past.  So, in this case, it does depend on what the meaning of "scandal" is.  Not in the eyes of lawyers, but in the eyes of voters.

Lichtman also argues that it's the incumbent's scandals that matter.  Which is why Republicans will try to tie Joe to Hunter in some unsavory way that feels like how Bill was attached, literally, to Monica.  That might be a hard one, pun intended. 🙄  So maybe "scandal" won't hurt Trump as a challenger in the way it did, according to Lichtman, as an incumbent.  But when I read polls that say 60 % of Independents are okay with locking Trump up, if he is found guilty, it sure doesn't feel that way.

1 hour ago, BnaC said:

Looking at the actual law is useful - Do try to keep up!

To summarize:  try to keep up with the polls and elections, @Bnac.  That's what matters most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BnaC said:

You simply named the penal code cited….you didn’t read it, did you? 

Of course I read the codes. But you seem to think that I also have to disclose the AG's strategy and detailed documentation for fully proving the state's charges in the lawsuit. Hint: I don't. That's her job, and she's going to do it. 

I believe I've struck a very raw nerve! 🎯🎯🎯Otherwise, why would you stoop to the loser tactic of accusing me of being "banned" for past behavior? Ad hominem much? A sure sign of someone who's losing an argument. They don't call it a "fallacy" for nothing. 

And "uncivil"? You're simply embarrassed at being owned by a new guy who's been here only nine months. 🎯

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

×
×
  • Create New...