A mistaken estimate is not the same as a deliberate deception.
Right. And a decades-long PATTERN of deception is not a mistaken estimate. You were obviously not present for all the testimony.
As Judge Angoran correctly observed:
Judge Engoran did not “correctly” observe the things he claimed. He was just an overly partisan hack.
On the reaction of Trump and his adult sons:
“Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological. They are accused only of inflating asset values to make more money. The documents prove this over and over again. This is a venial sin, not a mortal sin. Defendants did not commit murder or arson. They did not rob a bank at gunpoint. Donald Trump is not Bernard Madoff. Yet, defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways. Instead, they adopt a ‘See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil’ posture that the evidence belies.”
Trump owes nobody contrition when he did nothing illegal or unethical or wrong.
On being confronted with their misdeeds:
“In order to borrow more and at lower rates, defendants submitted blatantly false financial data to the accountants, resulting in fraudulent financial statements. When confronted at trial with the statements, defendants’ fact and expert witnesses simply denied reality, and defendants failed to accept responsibility or to impose internal controls to prevent future recurrences.”
The claim that Trump and company submitted “blatantly false” data is itself false. Part of the judge’s partisan bias was thereby revealed.
On the severity of the penalty:
“In considering the need for ongoing injunctive relief, this Court is mindful that this action is not the first time the Trump Organization or its related entities has been found to have engaged in corporate malfeasance. Of course, the more evidence there is of defendants’ ongoing propensity to engage in fraud, the more need there is for the Court to impose stricter injunctive relief. This is not defendants’ first rodeo.”
Any claimed prior “findings” of corporate “malfeasance” have nothing to do with whether (or not) he and the company engaged in any in this matter.
On Trump as a witness:
“Overall, Donald Trump rarely responded to the questions asked, and he frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial. His refusal to answer the questions directly, or in some cases, at all, severely compromised his credibility.”
Nonsense. President Trump addressed matters very pertinent to what he was being subjected to. The judge didn’t want any of it mentioned. No surprise there.
I expect this abortion of a verdict and judgment to be overturned largely on the basis of some of what Trump was addressing. The judge perhaps didn’t want those complaints preserved on the future appellate record.
@DeplorableInfidel you would do well to read the transcripts, and ferret out any part where you feel that the judge's findings of fact were in error. Every legal mind I know has expressed confidence that this case was conducted very conservatively with the inevitable appeal (delay) in mind, and is quite airtight. I wonder where you got the idea that the judge was in error.
Oh, wait.... no I don't. It's pretty apparent where you got that notion.
You are in error having been misled not just by the AG and the biased judge but by the sloppy media misreporting the alleged “facts.”
In the immortal words of Ahnold: I’ll be back.
