• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Donald the Orange and Family Sued in NY

 
 
 
ideologyhunter said:
In the 1990s, Spy Magazine sent 13 cent checks to various famous affluent folks, to see who would take the time to sign and cash them. Trump did. (I think only one other check came back endorsed by the payee.)
But he paid $130K to a woman he didn't actually rail, because he didn't want to upset his family? Right. If you believe that, you should get your Trump Bobble Head at 50% off (plus $89.99 for shipping/handling.)
Click to expand...

This story is too good not to cite:
patch.com

Donald Trump Once Cashed A 13-Cent Check: Incredible True Stories Of President Trump

Trump may be a lot of things, but he's not a man who will turn down free money — no matter how small the amount.
patch.com patch.com
 
Trump appeals New York fraud verdict and $464 million judgment - "There was no indication the former president posted a bond to stay the enforcement of the judgment won by New York Attorney General Letitia James."

Judge Engoron fines Trump more than $350M, bars him from running businesses in N.Y. for 3 years

 New York civil investigation of The Trump Organization - the verdict was on February 16

For an appeal, one has to post a bond for the amount under contention, and one has 30 days to do so. That means a deadline of March 17.
 
lpetrich said:
Trump appeals New York fraud verdict and $464 million judgment - "There was no indication the former president posted a bond to stay the enforcement of the judgment won by New York Attorney General Letitia James."

Judge Engoron fines Trump more than $350M, bars him from running businesses in N.Y. for 3 years

 New York civil investigation of The Trump Organization - the verdict was on February 16

For an appeal, one has to post a bond for the amount under contention, and one has 30 days to do so. That means a deadline of March 17.
Click to expand...
It's an appeal notice. Not an actual appeal. Appeal notices are required by the NY courts.
 
Swammerdami said:
ideologyhunter said:
In the 1990s, Spy Magazine sent 13 cent checks to various famous affluent folks, to see who would take the time to sign and cash them. Trump did. (I think only one other check came back endorsed by the payee.)
But he paid $130K to a woman he didn't actually rail, because he didn't want to upset his family? Right. If you believe that, you should get your Trump Bobble Head at 50% off (plus $89.99 for shipping/handling.)
Click to expand...

This story is too good not to cite:
patch.com

Donald Trump Once Cashed A 13-Cent Check: Incredible True Stories Of President Trump

Trump may be a lot of things, but he's not a man who will turn down free money — no matter how small the amount.
patch.com patch.com
Click to expand...
It's also mathematically symmetrical (or...it's been 50+ years since I've been in math class...exponentially charged?) The 13 cent check Trumpie cashed is exactly one millionth the value of the check he cut to Stormy. I find his claim that they never had sex to be unbelievable by a factor of a million to one.
 
All courts require appeal notices. He still has till March 25 to come up with the money to stay the enforcement or collection.

Meanwhile, in the Carroll case, he has already asked for an unsecured or partially secured bond to stay the enforcement of the comparatively measly $83 million.
 
blastula said:
Meanwhile, in the Carroll case, he has already asked for an unsecured or partially secured bond to stay the enforcement of the comparatively measly $83 million.
Click to expand...

He's got sycophantic supporters who are collectively rich but even so, half a gigabuck is a lot of moolah.
If he gets the bucks to get the whole bond, it will exhaust financially his donors.
He's already full-speed-ahead on turning the whole RNC into his personal cash-box.
The grift has no bounds.

BUT... BUT... The GOP money-men are increasingly alert to this problem. They will want to put a stop to it.
Expect a forced substitution of Nikki Haley at some point.
I realize Charles Koch may not see it that way: I read that he's stopped funding Ms. Haley.
But I think there's a highish chance she will be the GOP standard-bearer, and then win in November.
Whether by luck or by pluck, Gopsters should be happy to have Nikki Haley ready to go to the mound from the bull-pen.
(If you didn't know, I regard Haley as a bat-shit and despicable fascist and view her election as disastrous,
if not as disastrous as Trump's would be.)

But do the Democrats have anyone warming up in the bull-pen? Not that I can see.
Just the opposite, with RFK Jr. threatening to bomb in and destroy the Ds chance.
Infidels! Help me! Is Newsom the man?
WHO in the name of the Holy Dove will the Ds nominate once they realize Biden isn't viable?
(Sorry if my news isn't good.)
 
Swammerdami said:
blastula said:
Meanwhile, in the Carroll case, he has already asked for an unsecured or partially secured bond to stay the enforcement of the comparatively measly $83 million.
Click to expand...

He's got sycophantic supporters who are collectively rich but even so, half a gigabuck is a lot of moolah.
If he gets the bucks to get the whole bond, it will exhaust financially his donors.
He's already full-speed-ahead on turning the whole RNC into his personal cash-box.
The grift has no bounds.

BUT... BUT... The GOP money-men are increasingly alert to this problem. They will want to put a stop to it.
Expect a forced substitution of Nikki Haley at some point.
I realize Charles Koch may not see it that way: I read that he's stopped funding Ms. Haley.
But I think there's a highish chance she will be the GOP standard-bearer, and then win in November.
Whether by luck or by pluck, Gopsters should be happy to have Nikki Haley ready to go to the mound from the bull-pen.
(If you didn't know, I regard Haley as a bat-shit and despicable fascist and view her election as disastrous,
if not as disastrous as Trump's would be.)

But do the Democrats have anyone warming up in the bull-pen? Not that I can see.
Just the opposite, with RFK Jr. threatening to bomb in and destroy the Ds chance.
Infidels! Help me! Is Newsom the man?
WHO in the name of the Holy Dove will the Ds nominate once they realize Biden isn't viable?
(Sorry if my news isn't good.)
Click to expand...

He's gonna have to go for the bond, and I guess we'll see if he can get it down to a percentage, and then if he's cash-rich enough to cover that. If not? Fire sale on Trump golf resorts?

Personally I'm wishing that he can't make it and Tish takes Trump Tower, but I think her threatening that was just her way of saying "we're serious this time."

As for the GOP and the RNC? They know they have a problem, and they WANT to put a stop to it, but they hitched their little red wagon to the Trump Train, and the coupling has rusted shut. In fact, both the GOP and Trump absolutely have to win in November. Him to keep himself out of jail (maybe), and the party to keep themselves from having to finally get around to implementing those changes they said they needed after they lost to Obama in 2012. It's gonna be a bitter pill for both if he loses.

As for the Democrats? Come on...does no one else see it? The heir to the "I've been waiting in the wings" throne is going to be Harris. She's a woman of color, VP, and even though she's about as popular as Nikki Haley, they'll run with her because that's what they do. Pick the candidate that "deserves" the slot whether they're good or not. Gore was a pale shadow of Bill Clinton, they really lucked out with Obama (and also didn't follow their usual pattern) but then came right back with Hillary and followed it up with Biden...who only won because the country was a dumpster fire and Trump was exposed as a terrible choice.
 
blastula said:
All courts require appeal notices. He still has till March 25 to come up with the money to stay the enforcement or collection.

Meanwhile, in the Carroll case, he has already asked for an unsecured or partially secured bond to stay the enforcement of the comparatively measly $83 million.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can imagine the bonding agencies would have a problem with uncontrollable laughter after that request. Kind of like 'if you have to ask how much it is, you can't afford it' type of thing.

If you can't secure it now, you likely can't afford to pay it when you lose. And Trump has nothing on an appeal with the Carroll case. So who in their right might mind would spot him an unsecured $90 or so million?
 
article said:
Trump lawyers said Trump’s vast real estate assets and oversight mandated by Engoron’s ruling, including supervision of his company by an independent monitor, “would alone be sufficient to adequately secure any judgment affirmed.”
Click to expand...
This indicates he doesn't have the capital available. But you can trust him to pay up his penalty on fraud related malfeasance.
 
ideologyhunter said:
So, if a bank gives you a lower interest rate because you've distorted your true worth, you haven't cheated the bank? Just asking.
Click to expand...
You maybe tried. Maybe.

But the short answer is “no.” An attempt isn’t the same thing.

And the reality is: no bank ever just accepts the applicant’s valuations.
 
DeplorableInfidel said:
ideologyhunter said:
So, if a bank gives you a lower interest rate because you've distorted your true worth, you haven't cheated the bank? Just asking.
Click to expand...
You maybe tried. Maybe.

But the short answer is “no.” An attempt isn’t the same thing.

And the reality is: no bank ever just accepts the applicant’s valuations.
Click to expand...
Do you have proof of this statement?

Low level clerks would love to get high level clients for the commission fees.
 
I'm still curious where it says in US Constitution or in US Federal Law there explicitly must be a victim for a crime to be committed. DepInf still hasn't provided that necessary piece of information to make his argument even remotely credible.
 
Still seems to me that if you pay millions less in interest fees on a loan, you are a fraudster, and you defrauded the bank. If that's not the basic meaning of the business fraud laws that Trump violated, I dunno.
 
Patooka said:
I'm still curious where it says in US Constitution or in US Federal Law there explicitly must be a victim for a crime to be committed. DepInf still hasn't provided that necessary piece of information to make his argument even remotely credible.
Click to expand...
There are victims, though: the people the banks squeeze for money to make up the deficits generated by these cheats.

Primarily, the bank is interested in profits, and they won't get those from Trump so they're gonna get them from someone.

The victims are the people who are held to the rules and squeezed specifically for the sake of such frauds.

Everyone who expects an impartial system is a victim.

I say charge the banks here, too.
 
Jarhyn said:
Patooka said:
I'm still curious where it says in US Constitution or in US Federal Law there explicitly must be a victim for a crime to be committed. DepInf still hasn't provided that necessary piece of information to make his argument even remotely credible.
Click to expand...
There are victims, though: the people the banks squeeze for money to make up the deficits generated by these cheats.

Primarily, the bank is interested in profits, and they won't get those from Trump so they're gonna get them from someone.

The victims are the people who are held to the rules and squeezed specifically for the sake of such frauds.

Everyone who expects an impartial system is a victim.

I say charge the banks here, too.
Click to expand...
I understand that - I just can't fathom the "no victim therefore no crime" attitude. It's not that hard to think of several laws on the books that have no victims but can get you into some serious shit if you perpetrate them. I'm wondering why DepInf isn't aware of that. Or perhaps he is aware and doesn't want to provide his opinion. Nevertheless, inquiring minds would like to know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom