Trump admits he'll have to sell buildings to come up with $450M in cash

I'm seeing conflicting reports, but just to verify, it is only the bond that they reduced and not the final amount that will be owed if the appeal fails?

 

It’s only the bond amount

 

Yes they didn't review the merits of the case, just to the legitimacy of the "fine" to appeal. There are two other appeals, one is on the merits of the case and ruling and one is on constitutional merit of the fine. I would probably start reading up on Timbs vs Indiana that @AFM brought up in another thread, it appears the precedent set by the SC in that case, and one in which none other than Ruth Ginsburg agreed with, paves the way for Trump to get this overturned.

https://www.dailynews.com/2024/02/2...fine/#:~:text=Let me tell,Ruth Bader Ginsburg

 

At best, the fine gets reduced. There's nothing unconstitutional about a civil fine. It's also highly unlikely that this would ever go to SCOTUS.

 

It will go to the Supreme Court for many arguments which show that this prosecution and ruling are unconstitutional.

 

You have yet to find anything unconstitutional. And it would take a minor miracle for the SC to hear an appeal for a civil state case.

 

lol ok, and again, I posted the case and the story on how and why an excessive state fine made it to the Supreme Court. Precedent is set and was done so with the vote of the liberal goddess, Ruth Ginsberg. See there was a time when liberals didn't like courts using their power to sue individuals for exuberant sums, hence hurting the little guy.

 

It will be heard for the reasons I have posted upthread.

 

Yes. You posted a link saying big numbers bad. Unfortunately for your claim, however, there have been other cases with bigger civil penalties than you still haven't come to terms with the fact that SCOTUS almost never hears civil state cases. See, there was a time when Trump supporters cared about the rule of law and didn't want anyone held above it . . . just kidding, that time never existed. But points for pretending to care about "the little guy" while defending a big guy con man.

 

It won't, for the reasons I've posted and am willing to discuss. The facts don't care about your feelings.

 

You are ignoring reality and precedent.

 

I'm ignoring neither. I just do a bit of homework instead of blindly copy/pasting propaganda that makes me feel good.

 

Not at the level of inflation.

 

Don’t be dishonest. No one said a president can order oil companies to produce more oil. A president's policies can prevent production to keep up with demand though. That’s what’s happening today. OPEC loves it.

 

Start a new thread with this nonsense.

 

As I said, never been one in NY ever brought without a victim that was defrauded. To your point, which I wasn't discussing, show me a private company with a fine that size for a crime without a victim, I'll wait.

 

LOL never heard of Real Wages I guess. Unbelievably poor argument for you because Inflation has outpaced wages by a large margin but carry on.

 

So where did that money from increased prices go?

 

Where it always goes. What’s your point?

 

Facts are nonsense? Interesting.

 

Where?

 

Where do you think your money goes when the cost of living rises? That’s kind of a weird question.

What you should be concerned with is how you handle prices riding faster than your income.

What you should be concerned with is how you handle having less buying power.

 

LOL It went to the private oil companies that Trump gave tax cuts too. Are you against this profiteering and you want the government to put an end to it? Obvious why you stayed away from that line. Or maybe I'm giving you too much credit that you even understood the graphs I provided above

 

Those are some grade schoolers' attempts to give people like you pretend talking points, not "facts". Quit posting off-topic and start a new thread on this very misguided claim.

 

I’m just responding to comments made by others.