Trump ordered to pay over $350M for business fraud

New York businesses are not SO gleeful over the decision..

New york business worried about government overreach - Search (bing.com)

But they are wiser than the average Democrat voter, and know this sets precedence.. Government says, "DO AS I SAY or WE TAKE YOUR STUFF"..

And they will eventually, because that's what our grubmint does

 

But the ruling goes against the 12 and only previous applications of the law which required damages. The ruling goes against precedent.

What it does say is that the New York justice system will break precedent for political reasons. That’s what is scary to New York businesses.

 

All I know is that no one got hurt in the deal accept the guy that paid back the loan It's pretty clear that NY business is pretty concerned with the precedence this has created..

Their the ones to keep and eye on in this matter!!

 

Agreed. I was attempting to point out that this ruling went against all previous precedent in the application of the law. The same thing could happen at anytime to any New York business in the appliof any law. The Stalinesque saying should be modified slightly in New York ‘show me the man and I will change the law to create a crime’.

 

Hardly surprising from this guy considering his backround with the Reagan and Bush administrations, advisor to Meese, as well as a co-chairman of the Federalist society.

As a far rightie, he would have nothing good to say about this prosecution simply as a result of his political standing. And his "bill of attainder" argument is total slop.

Is he really arguing that just because the Orange Stain is one of the few prosecuted that he is being singled out ? I could just as easily argue that Orange broke the law so extremely and for so long that he finally attracted the attention of the authorities.

More the fool is Trump for thinking he could be a criminal for so long.

 

This ruling is a judgment of attainder. Why? Because application of the law precedence was changed to punish one individual.

 

he despises Trump as does at least one of the other Federalist founders-former Acting AG and top level appellate attorney Peter Keisler who wrote a rather wave making article saying why he was not going to support Trump last time around.

so tell me what is your proof that the bill of attainder argument is "total slop".

 

Well - you just made up a new legal term and completely mangled your effort to discuss precedent.
So 0 for 2 on your efforts there.

 

Who are these "top" Constitutional scholars?

 

Calabresi being one of them. I am sure you know who he is if you actually care

 

Precedent was changed to punish one man. Simple to understand.

 

Which case is the precedent that you say was changed?
Full citation with a link please.

 

Are we now to believe that it's good for business to permit businesses to make false statements in their business documents? That poor persecuted Donald Trump is the only victim of the series of statutes that his mouthiest supporters refuse to read?

 

Source? This seems like a new claim that you made up.

 

So, having failed to discredit the Decision on the Law, you people now turn to crying "persecution" for a criminal.

I'll borrow @Nemesis post:

 

Still 0fer.

 

There are only 12 cases with large settlements since the law was enacted in 1956. In all 12 of those damages were required. Look upthread.

 

That wasn't the question...lol

 

Posted Upthread.

 

So as long as nobody gets hurt while driving drunk, the driver shouldn't be punished?!?

 

Just not how it works...lol

 

Then it will be reversed on appeal. Right?

Wrong. Because it’s not remotely like you claim it is. Read it and you’ll see how painfully off-base you are.

 

Take some time to read the decision, my dear friend. I stand ready to accept your gracious apology.

 

None of them will read it. It will burst their little bubble of a universe where the Orange Stain did, and can do, no wrong.

 

Driving drunk is illegal. If a driver is pulled over and fails a sobriety test he will be prosecuted.