• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

NY AG files civil fraud suit against Trump

Hercules56 said:
Why didn't NY charge Trump with criminal fraud? Why just a civil case? I dont get it.
Click to expand...
A few issues here...

The civil charges were brought by the NY Attorney General Leticia James. In general, the Attorney General focuses on civil charges; it is the job of the District attorney to bring criminal charges.

Over a year ago, the district attorney at the time (Cy Vance) had a legal team looking into criminal charges (and it was thought that criminal charges were imminent). However, his term ended and the new DA Alvin Bragg decided not to file charges at the time. (It caused a lot of controversy, with members of his legal team resigning because they thought there was more than enough evidence to convict.) However, the door has not shut on the possibility of criminal charges in the future. My hope is that seeing Trump lose the civil case will give Bragg enough backbone to finally file criminal charges.

So why wouldn't Bragg file criminal charges when it seemed so easy to find him liable in a civil trial? There are a couple of reasons:

- In a criminal case you need a unanimous decision, "beyond a reasonable doubt". In a civil case you don't need all jurors to agree, and the standard is "a preponderance of evidence". This makes it harder to get a criminal conviction, something a DA might worry about

- In a criminal trial, you have to deal with evidence in a different way, tying to a particular person, dealing with "Mens Rea" (i.e. "criminal mind"), and the evidence might just not be there to get a conviction criminally even if the evidence supports civil charges

Or it could also simply be a case of personality... some prosecutors may simply be more willing to be aggressive when going after criminals.
 
9abb73d1348d771847c24fc187d0db09.jpg
 
If this sticks, if I get Commentators right, Trump and everyone else on the list would have to sell all their NY assets and the stuff they hold, like Mara Lago and the Trump Brand.
Since this would be a fire sale, what he would get would probably not exceed the loans one them by much.
And if a Saudi or Russian Head of State would be willing to pay Top Dollar, then Trump would have to pay a ton of taxes on the profit.
Ande, of course, this is the chance for everyone Trump hasn't paid to get in line and get theirs.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
If this sticks, if I get Commentators right, Trump and everyone else on the list would have to sell all their NY assets and the stuff they hold, like Mara Lago and the Trump Brand.
Since this would be a fire sale, what he would get would probably not exceed the loans one them by much.
And if a Saudi or Russian Head of State would be willing to pay Top Dollar, then Trump would have to pay a ton of taxes on the profit.
Ande, of course, this is the chance for everyone Trump hasn't paid to get in line and get theirs.
Click to expand...

It wouldn’t necessarily be a fire sale. The receiver has a responsibility to the creditors to responsibly liquidate the assets. It probably will take years. A Russian head of State has been sanctioned under International law. He's not going to buy Trump's assets.
 
CNN really pissed me off this morning in their coverage of Trump's arrival at the courthouse. Endless coverage of the motorcade arriving, and people walking through the entrance (One anchor even said as they vamped "More people walking..."). Then Trump actually arrives and begins speaking at the mic, and they cut away.

"Well, it's just another campaign speech. But here is more panel discussion of it!"

It's maybe the first time I actually switched over to Fox News on purpose because I knew they'd be covering it. Yeah, he did say all the same old ****, but I was hoping he'd slip and say something that would get him in trouble later.

(eta -- cut to the courtroom and the judge mugging for the camera. Oh, that's gonna generate some memes...)
 
Last edited:
Saw a comment this weekend, "90% of conservative outrage is just conservatives discovering how things work for the first time."

See the current court case in NY. Conservatives are outraged because they are just learning that lawyers have to actually choose a jury trial, and if they don't do it, then there is not a jury trial.
 
acbytesla said:
It wouldn’t necessarily be a fire sale. The receiver has a responsibility to the creditors to responsibly liquidate the assets. It probably will take years. A Russian head of State has been sanctioned under International law. He's not going to buy Trump's assets.
Click to expand...

of course Putin won't.

but his American Twin Cousin Shmutin might.
 
alfaniner said:
CNN really pissed me off this morning in their coverage of Trump's arrival at the courthouse. Endless coverage of the motorcade arriving, ... Then Trump actually arrives and begins speaking at the mic, and they cut away.
Click to expand...
I can't really blame CNN for that.

One of the complaints that people have had regarding the media coverage of Trump is that they gave him too much leeway to spread lies, without any way to properly fact-check him in real time.

Yes, allowing Trump to spew gibberish at an open mic might have resulted in a few amusing gaffs being broadcast, but it would also allow him to chant "witch hunt", "corrupt judge", etc. all things that elevate him in the eyes of his supporters.

Better to just record the speech, see if there is anything new/unique, and give the chance for the network anchors to put his comments in context and challenge any inaccuracies.


Sent from my moto e using Tapatalk
 
Segnosaur said:
I can't really blame CNN for that.

One of the complaints that people have had regarding the media coverage of Trump is that they gave him too much leeway to spread lies, without any way to properly fact-check him in real time.

Yes, allowing Trump to spew gibberish at an open mic might have resulted in a few amusing gaffs being broadcast, but it would also allow him to chant "witch hunt", "corrupt judge", etc. all things that elevate him in the eyes of his supporters.

Better to just record the speech, see if there is anything new/unique, and give the chance for the network anchors to put his comments in context and challenge any inaccuracies.


Sent from my moto e using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think those were spewed inside of his first two sentences. Yeah, nothing new here. I just like seeing him squirm, such as it is.
 
So, Trump seemed happy after leaving the court.
I couldn't really understand what he was saying, but it seemed like it went his way.

Surprise... :rolleyes:
 
"Trump denies wrongdoing. He says that James and the judge are undervaluing such assets as his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, and he emphasizes that his financial statements had a disclaimer that says they shouldn’t be trusted. The yearly snapshots of his holdings were given to banks to secure loans and to financial magazines to justify his place among the world’s billionaires."

Wtf?

https://apnews.com/article/eb98c99fe918da139b0d8b6347211afe

He even admits it!
 
carlosy said:
So, Trump seemed happy after leaving the court.
I couldn't really understand what he was saying, but it seemed like it went his way.

Surprise... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Uh, Trump is often delusional.
Or are you one of those who think the whole justice system is rigged in favor ot Trump?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom