Donald Trump Announces 2016 White House Bid

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,642
6,982
113
B.C.
Your comment about the government having his financials has a caveat with it. With old Donnie telling everyone that looks at any of his financials, do not believe anything that is contained in this, income, expenses, and for sure indicated profits. If you believe anything contained, you are a fool. Now old Donnie things that banks will lend him money for his laws suits he has lost.
Makes sense to me . String him up .
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,829
3,032
113
Donald Trump appeals $454 million judgment in New York civil fraud case
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak
Published Feb 26, 2024 • < 1 minute read
Within days, Trump could potentially have his sprawling real estate business empire ordered "dissolved" for repeated misrepresentations on financial statements to lenders, adding him to a short list of scam marketers, con artists and others who have been hit with the ultimate punishment for violating New York's powerful anti-fraud law.
Within days, Trump could potentially have his sprawling real estate business empire ordered "dissolved" for repeated misrepresentations on financial statements to lenders, adding him to a short list of scam marketers, con artists and others who have been hit with the ultimate punishment for violating New York's powerful anti-fraud law.
NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump has appealed his $454 million New York civil fraud judgment, challenging a judge’s finding that Trump lied about his wealth as he grew the real estate empire that launched him to stardom and the presidency.

The former president’s lawyers filed a notice of appeal Monday asking the state’s mid-level appeals court to overturn Judge Arthur Engoron’s Feb. 16 verdict in Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit.


Trump’s lawyers wrote in court papers that they’re asking the appeals court to decide whether Engoron “committed errors of law and/or fact” and whether he abused his discretion and/or his jurisdiction.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,829
3,032
113
Republican National Committee chair Ronna McDaniel will leave post on March 8
Trump has said his preference is North Carolina GOP chair Michael Whatley

Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Steve Peoples
Published Feb 26, 2024 • Last updated 3 days ago • 3 minute read

NEW YORK — Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel will leave her post on March 8, having been forced out of the GOP’s national leadership as Donald Trump moves toward another presidential nomination and asserts control over the party.


McDaniel announced her decision in a statement on Monday morning.


“I have decided to step aside at our Spring Training on March 8 in Houston to allow our nominee to select a Chair of their choosing,” McDaniel said in the statement. “The RNC has historically undergone change once we have a nominee and it has always been my intention to honor that tradition.”

The move was not a surprise. Trump earlier in the month announced his preference for North Carolina GOP Chair Michael Whatley, a little-known veteran operative focused in recent years on the prospect of voter fraud, to replace McDaniel. Trump also picked his daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, to serve as committee co-chair.

The 50-year-old McDaniel was a strong advocate for the former president and helped reshape the GOP in his image. But Trump’s MAGA movement increasingly blamed McDaniel for the former president’s 2020 loss and the party’s failures to meet expectations in races the last two years.


In addition to McDaniel, RNC co-chair Drew McKissick said he would also leave.

The leadership shakeup comes as the GOP shifts from the primary phase to the general election of the 2024 presidential contest. While former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley has remained in the race, Trump has won every state in the primary calendar and could clinch the Republican nomination by mid-March.

Haley told reporters in Grand Rapids, Michigan, on Monday that the RNC was turning into “Donald Trump’s playpen.”

“The idea that they would be choosing a chair and a director before a primary is a massive control move by Donald Trump,” she said.

Trump cannot make leadership changes without the formal backing of the RNC’s 168-member governing body, but McDaniel had little choice but to acquiesce to Trump’s wishes given his status as the party’s likely presidential nominee and his popularity with party activists. RNC members from across the country are expected to approve Trump’s decision in March.


McDaniel was the the committee’s longest-serving leader since the Civil War. The niece of Utah Sen. Mitt Romney and a former chair of the Michigan GOP, she was Trump’s hand-picked choice to lead the RNC chair shortly after the 2016 election. Her profile as a suburban mother was also considered especially helpful as the party struggled to appeal to suburban women in the Trump era.

McDaniel easily beat back criticism from opponents within the “Make America Great Again” movement to win reelection as party chair a year ago. But her opponents’ voices are carrying more weight. The party is also struggling to raise money. The RNC reported $8.7 million in the bank at the beginning of February compared to the Democratic National Committee’s $24 million.


While the new leadership structure, effectively a Trump campaign takeover of the RNC, is widely expected to be embraced by members, Henry Barbour, a national committeeman from Mississippi, has been circulating a pair of draft resolutions — one pushing to keep the committee neutral until Trump is officially the presidential nominee and another that would bar the committee from paying his legal bills.

Lara Trump has suggested that GOP voters would likely want the RNC to cover her father-in-law’s legal bills given that they see the 91 felony counts against him as an example of political persecution. It’s unclear whether the RNC’s 168 members will eventually agree.

Chris LaCivita, Trump’s senior campaign adviser who will run day-to-day operations at the RNC, has said the organization won’t use party funds to pay Trump’s legal bills.


Trump, meanwhile, also wants allies who echo his false theories of voter fraud. That’s a key reason why Trump is believed to have tapped Whatley, currently the North Carolina GOP chair and general counsel to the RNC.

Trump won North Carolina in 2020 by just over 1 percentage point and the state is expected to be highly competitive again this year.

Whatley has taken credit for hiring an army of lawyers ahead of the 2020 election, which he has said stymied Democratic efforts to commit voter fraud that year. There was no evidence of any intentional efforts to commit widespread voter fraud in multiple investigations and court cases.

Whatley also has strong connections to the political establishment. His resume includes experience as an oil and gas lobbyist and links to establishment figures like George W. Bush and former Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,829
3,032
113
Letter containing white powder sent to Donald Trump Jr.’s home
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Jill Colvin And David Fischer
Published Feb 26, 2024 • Last updated 3 days ago • 1 minute read

MIAMI — Emergency crews responded Monday after a letter containing an unidentified white powder was sent to the Florida home of Donald Trump Jr., the eldest son of former President and GOP front-runner Donald Trump.

A person familiar with the matter said that results on the substance were inconclusive, but officials do not believe it was deadly. The person spoke on condition of anonymity to confirm details of the letter, which were first reported by The Daily Beast.


Trump Jr. opened the letter, which also contained a death threat, in his home office, and emergency responders wearing hazmat suits responded.



Jupiter police said the investigation is being handled by the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office, which said it was working with the U.S. Secret Service but didn’t have any further details. The Secret Service declined to comment.

Trump Jr. is one of his father’s top campaign surrogates, frequently headlining events and appearing in interviews on his behalf.

It’s the second time white powder has been sent to the former president’s oldest son. In 2018, his then-wife, Vanessa, was taken to a New York City hospital after she opened an envelope addressed to her husband that contained an unidentified white powder. Police later said the substance wasn’t dangerous.

In March 2016, police detectives and FBI agents investigated a threatening letter sent to the Manhattan apartment of Donald Trump Jr.’s brother Eric that also contained a white powder that turned out to be harmless.

Envelopes containing white powder were also sent twice in 2016 to Trump Tower, which served as Trump’s campaign headquarters.

Hoax attacks using white powder play on fears that date to 2001, when letters containing deadly anthrax were mailed to news organizations and the offices of two U.S. senators. Those letters killed five people.

— Colvin reported from New York.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,829
3,032
113
Threat of seizing Trump's assets 'scary' for investors, Dragons' Den star says
Author of the article:postmedia News
Published Feb 28, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 2 minute read

Canadian investment guru Kevin O’Leary warned against the potential seizure of Donald Trump’s assets, saying this “happens in Venezuela, it doesn’t happen in New York.”


O’Leary, of Dragons’ Den and Shark Tank television fame, commented on Trump’s situation on the Fox Business Network’s Mornings with Maria show earlier this week.


The former president’s assets could be seized should he fail to pay the nine-figure fine in his civil fraud case. The 2024 Republican front-runner is on the hook for more than $354 million with post-judgment interest accruing at nearly $112,000 per day.

New York Attorney General Letitia James has vowed that if Trump fails to pay, the state will start seizing his assets.



O’Leary, a businessman and chair of O’Leary Ventures, said the move by the New York court has developers wondering whether the fine penalty interest is proportionate to the act.


“Remember, there is no money lost, there’s no victim here, so essentially just under half-a-billion-dollar fine for a situation where no monies were lost and the harmed party, supposedly the banks, were fully paid back,” O’Leary said, according to the New York Post. “We are wondering does this make sense, asking ourselves how long will it take for the appellate court to bring down to what a reasonable number might be? I have no idea what that is.”

New York Judge Arthur Engoron ruled that Trump and the defendants were liable for “persistent and repeated fraud,” “falsifying business records,” “issuing false financial statements,” “conspiracy to falsify false financial statements,” “insurance fraud” and “conspiracy to commit insurance fraud.”


Trump’s legal team has appealed.

O’Leary said investors are not putting any new money into projects in New York while the case is being litigated, adding he is “very concerned” about the next step of seizing assets.

“Capital comes to America because of the stability of the justice system,” he said. “This is not stable, in terms of many people’s eyes, domestically and internationally. Seizing assets happens in Venezuela, it doesn’t happen in New York. So this is a little scary.”

Powerhouse industries such as hydropower, commercial real estate and Al data will be affected in New York, O’Leary said, likely leading to a “quiet exodus of capital leaving New York.

“It’s going to North Dakota, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Montana, Tennessee. They have the same power and if you look at governors there, spending that much money you are in partnership with the government,” he said. “New York is no longer on that list.”
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,829
3,032
113
U.S. Supreme Court sets April arguments over whether Trump can be prosecuted for election interference
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Mark Sherman
Published Feb 28, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 4 minute read

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to decide whether former President Donald Trump can be prosecuted on charges he interfered with the 2020 election, calling into question whether his case could go to trial before the November election.


While the court set a course for a quick resolution, it maintained a hold on preparations for a trial focused on Trump’s efforts to overturn his election loss. The court will hear arguments in late April, with a decision likely no later than the end of June.


That timetable is much faster than usual, but assuming the justices deny Trump’s immunity bid, it’s not clear whether a trial can be scheduled and concluded before the November election. Early voting in some states will begin in September.

The court’s decision to intervene in a second major Trump case this term, along with the dispute over whether he is barred from being president again because of his actions following the 2020 election, underscores the direct role the justices will have in the outcome of the election.


Trump’s lawyers have sought to put off a trial until after the election.

In the end, the timing of a possible trial could come down to how quickly the justices rule. They have shown they can act fast, issuing a decision in the Watergate tapes case in 1974 just 16 days after hearing arguments. The decision in Bush v. Gore came the day after arguments in December 2000.

By taking up the legally untested question now, the justices have created a scenario of uncertainty that special counsel Jack Smith had sought to avoid when he first asked the high court in December to immediately intervene. In his latest court filing, Smith had suggested arguments a full month earlier than the late April timeframe.

Trump wrote on Truth Social that legal scholars “are extremely thankful” the court stepped in to decide on immunity. “Presidents will always be concerned, and even paralyzed, by the prospect of wrongful prosecution and retaliation after they leave office,” he wrote.


A Smith spokesperson declined to comment.

The trial date, already postponed once by Trump’s immunity appeal, is of paramount importance to both sides. Prosecutors are looking to bring Trump to trial this year while defence lawyers have been seeking delays in his criminal cases. If Trump were to be elected with the case pending, he could presumably use his authority as head of the executive branch to order the Justice Department to dismiss it or could potentially seek to pardon himself.

Though their Supreme Court filing did not explicitly mention the upcoming November election or Trump’s status as the Republican primary front-runner, prosecutors described the case as having “unique national importance” and said that “delay in the resolution of these charges threatens to frustrate the public interest in a speedy and fair verdict.”


Trump’s lawyers have cast the prosecution in partisan terms, telling the justices that “a months-long criminal trial of President Trump at the height of election season will radically disrupt President Trump’s ability to campaign against President Biden — which appears to be the whole point of the Special Counsel’s persistent demands for expedition.”

The court said in an unsigned statement that it will consider “whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.”

The Supreme Court has previously held that presidents are immune from civil liability for official acts, and Trump’s lawyers have for months argued that that protection should be extended to criminal prosecution as well.


Lower courts have, so far, rejected Trump’s novel claim that former presidents enjoy absolute immunity for actions that fall within their official job duties. A panel of appellate judges in Washington ruled earlier in February that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who would preside over the election interference trial, was right to say that the case could proceed and that Trump could be prosecuted for actions undertaken while in the White House and in the run-up to Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of his supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol.

The issue reached the high court because the appeals court refused to grant the delay that Trump had sought.

The case is separate from the high court’s consideration of Trump’s appeal to remain on the presidential ballot despite attempts to kick him off because of his efforts following his election loss in 2020. During arguments on Feb. 8, the court seemed likely to side with Trump. A decision could come at any time.


The high court also will hear an appeal in April from one of the more than 1,200 people charged in the Capitol riot. The case could upend a charge prosecutors have brought against more than 300 people, including Trump.

The election interference case in Washington is one of four prosecutions Trump faces as he seeks to reclaim the White House. Of those, the only one with a trial date that seems poised to hold is his state case in New York, where he’s charged with falsifying business records in connection with hush money payments to a porn actor. That case is set for trial on March 25, and a judge this month signaled his determination to press ahead.

A separate case charging him with illegally hoarding classified records is set for trial on May 20, but a pivotal hearing on Friday seems likely to result in a delay. No date has been set in a separate state case in Atlanta charging him with scheming to subvert that state’s 2020 election.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
35,829
3,032
113
Appellate judge refuses to halt Trump’s $454 million fraud penalty while he appeals
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak and Jennifer Peltz
Published Feb 28, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 5 minute read

NEW YORK — A New York appellate judge on Wednesday refused to halt collection of Donald Trump’s $454 million civil fraud penalty while he appeals, leaving the former president less than a month to pay the staggering sum or secure a bond covering the full amount he owes.


Judge Anil Singh of the state’s mid-level appeals court rejected Trump’s offer of a $100 million bond, though he did give Trump leeway that could help him secure the necessary bond before New York Attorney General Letitia James seeks to enforce the judgment starting March 25.


Singh granted a stay pausing part of Judge Arthur Engoron’s Feb. 16 verdict that barred Trump, his company and co-defendants from borrowing money from New York financial institutions. The Republican presidential front-runner’s lawyers had told the appellate court earlier Wednesday that the lending ban had made it impossible for him to secure a bond for the full amount.

Trump’s lawyers warned he may need to sell some properties to cover the penalty and would have no way of getting them back if he is successful in his appeal. State lawyers said those disclosures suggested Trump — who has more than a half-billion dollars in pending court debt — was having trouble coming up with enough cash to foot the bill. The penalty is increasing by nearly $112,000 each day because of interest and will eclipse $455 million on Saturday.


Trump’s lawyers proposed their smaller bond amount in court papers asking the appellate court for an order preventing James’ office from enforcing the judgment while his appeal plays out. Singh, sitting in the Appellate Division of the state’s trial court, ruled after an emergency hearing Wednesday.

Singh’s decision is temporary. A five-judge appellate panel will consider Trump’s request on an expedited basis, with a ruling expected in a few weeks. State lawyers must submit paperwork by March 11. Trump’s lawyers have until March 18 to respond.

In all, Trump and his co-defendants owe more than $465 million to the state. They have until March 25 to secure a stay — a legal mechanism pausing collection while he appeals the underlying verdict _ before they are forced to pay the penalty or risk having assets seized. Posting a bond in the full amount would trigger an automatic stay.


“The exorbitant and punitive amount of the judgment coupled with an unlawful and unconstitutional blanket prohibition on lending transactions would make it impossible to secure and post a complete bond,” Trump lawyers Clifford Robert, Alina Habba and Michael Farina wrote in court papers detailing the $100 million bond offer.

James’ office opposed Trump’s plan, saying his lawyers have all but conceded he has “insufficient liquid assets to satisfy the judgment.”

“These are precisely the circumstances for which a full bond or deposit is necessary,” Senior Assistant Solicitor General Dennis Fan wrote, saying Trump’s offer would leave James’ office and the state “with substantial shortfalls” if the verdict is upheld.


“A prevailing plaintiff is entitled to have her award secured, and defendants have never demonstrated that Mr. Trump’s liquid assets could satisfy the full amount of the judgment,” Fan wrote.

James, a Democrat, has said that she will seek to seize some of Trump’s assets if he’s unable to pay the judgment.

Engoron found that Trump, his company and top executives, including his sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr., schemed for years to deceive banks and insurers by inflating his wealth on financial statements used to secure loans and make deals.

Paperwork making the judgment official was filed on Feb. 23. That started a 30-day window for Trump to pay up or file an appeal and seek a stay.

Also Wednesday, white powder was found in an envelope addressed to Engoron at his Manhattan courthouse. Officials said preliminary testing showed it was negative for hazardous substances and no injuries were reported.


Trump filed his appeal on Monday. In their notices of appeal, his lawyers said they want the appellate court to decide whether Engoron “committed errors of law and/or fact” and whether he abused his discretion or “acted in excess” of his jurisdiction.

Trump wasn’t required to pay his penalty or post a bond in order to appeal, and filing the appeal did not automatically halt enforcement of the judgment.

Trump would receive an automatic stay if he were to put up money, assets or an appeal bond covering what he owes. He also had the option to ask the appeals court to grant a stay with a bond for a lower amount — a gambit rejected Wednesday.

Trump’s lawyers argued that his 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.”


The $100 million bond, they said, “would simply serve as further security.”

Trump’s lawyers did not ask to pause the monitor’s oversight, but Singh did halt some other sanctions affecting the Trump Organization, at least temporarily.

The appellate judge paused Engoron’s two-year ban on Eric and Donald Trump Jr. holding executive positions in New York corporations, meaning they can continue running the company. He also paused a similar three-year ban that applied to Trump, but said the company must move forward with hiring an independent compliance director to ensure it follows financial reporting obligations and rules.

Trump maintains that he is worth several billion dollars and testified last year that he had about $400 million in cash, in addition to properties and other investments, but his legal bills are piling up.


In all, Trump has at least $543.4 million in personal legal liabilities from Engoron’s ruling and two other civil court judgments in the last year.

In January, a jury ordered Trump to pay $83.3 million to writer E. Jean Carroll for defaming her after she accused him in 2019 of sexually assaulting her in the 1990s. Trump was also ordered to pay Carroll $5 million a jury awarded Carroll in a related trial last year. He denies the allegations.
 

justfred

Electoral Member
Dec 26, 2004
227
38
28
Drumheller
Does anyone else think that if old Donnie would have done things legally, would he not have had to spend $100 million on lawyers? I know if I had 100 million dollars, and spent none if it on lawyers, I would still have the 100 million dollars. Is he still doing things outside of the law, not understanding that someone is watching him? I suggest that old traditions can be hard to get people to change, and him being as belligerent as he is, he will not change. Maybe he just needs another half billion dollar kick in the balls to get the message across?
 

Taxslave2

House Member
Aug 13, 2022
2,763
1,679
113
Does anyone else think that if old Donnie would have done things legally, would he not have had to spend $100 million on lawyers? I know if I had 100 million dollars, and spent none if it on lawyers, I would still have the 100 million dollars. Is he still doing things outside of the law, not understanding that someone is watching him? I suggest that old traditions can be hard to get people to change, and him being as belligerent as he is, he will not change. Maybe he just needs another half billion dollar kick in the balls to get the message across?
Almost all the charges are politically motivated,trumped up by the Democrats to sway votes in the next election in case they ca rig the voting machines again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,578
7,083
113
Washington DC
Almost all the charges are politically motivated,trumped up by the Democrats to sway votes in the next election in case they ca rig the voting machines again.
You have no idea what the charges are, and one would think if it was that easy to rig the voting machines, they would have rigged themselves a majority in the House of Representatives.

By the way, why do you think the Republicans don't rig the machines? Too gawd-fearin' righteous, or just too stupid to know how?
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
5,724
3,598
113
Edmonton
Your comment about the government having his financials has a caveat with it. With old Donnie telling everyone that looks at any of his financials, do not believe anything that is contained in this, income, expenses, and for sure indicated profits. If you believe anything contained, you are a fool. Now old Donnie things that banks will lend him money for his laws suits he has lost.
His financials, like MOST financial have a caveat on it - i.e. do your own due diligence. Nothing wrong with that. I see it every time I do corporate & business taxes and see their financials they come with this caveat. Banks aren't stupid & will do their own due diligence as they should.

What the A.G. in NY is doing is making it extremely difficult for business especially if they don't cave to the "woke/progressive" mob. Trump won't be the last & if he is, it's because businesses are either complying or moving from the State. It's ridiculous to think that Trump did anything wrong because if he's found guilty (& since it's NY I suspect he will be) then all businesses are at risk.

Leticia James should be fired & disbarred!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,642
6,982
113
B.C.
Does anyone else think that if old Donnie would have done things legally, would he not have had to spend $100 million on lawyers? I know if I had 100 million dollars, and spent none if it on lawyers, I would still have the 100 million dollars. Is he still doing things outside of the law, not understanding that someone is watching him? I suggest that old traditions can be hard to get people to change, and him being as belligerent as he is, he will not change. Maybe he just needs another half billion dollar kick in the balls to get the message across?
Legal has nothing to do with it . Who did he defraud ? Of course you like the dumbocrats let hatred cloud vision . There are none so blind as those who refuse to see .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,642
6,982
113
B.C.
You have no idea what the charges are, and one would think if it was that easy to rig the voting machines, they would have rigged themselves a majority in the House of Representatives.

By the way, why do you think the Republicans don't rig the machines? Too gawd-fearin' righteous, or just too stupid to know how?
Yes you must be an internet lawyer to understand .
His financials, like MOST financial have a caveat on it - i.e. do your own due diligence. Nothing wrong with that. I see it every time I do corporate & business taxes and see their financials they come with this caveat. Banks aren't stupid & will do their own due diligence as they should.

What the A.G. in NY is doing is making it extremely difficult for business especially if they don't cave to the "woke/progressive" mob. Trump won't be the last & if he is, it's because businesses are either complying or moving from the State. It's ridiculous to think that Trump did anything wrong because if he's found guilty (& since it's NY I suspect he will be) then all businesses are at risk.

Leticia James should be fired & disbarred!!
James is now going after the meat packing industry . No more steak for the peasants .
 

justfred

Electoral Member
Dec 26, 2004
227
38
28
Drumheller
Legal has nothing to do with it . Who did he defraud ? Of course you like the dumbocrats let hatred cloud vision . There are none so blind as those who refuse to see .
It can be argued that because he got a more favourable rate of interest on a loan, you are having to pay more for your loan, or get less for your deposit.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,642
6,982
113
B.C.
It can be argued that because he got a more favourable rate of interest on a loan, you are having to pay more for your loan, or get less for your deposit.
That is no argument , but you already know that .
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,320
11,403
113
Low Earth Orbit
Whom Trump and his organization defrauded is in the case filings.
If you really were a lawyer you'd be aware there isnt a victim because its a victimless crime in violation of New York Executive Law § 63(12).

Remember when Ron posted a thread about pedophiles being arrested for just thinking about going online to talk to kids let alone met a kid where I taught you about criminal intent being enough to establish mens rea to nail pedophiles? The same applies here. Its a crime against God what whats right


Problem though, criminal intent was never proven by the States Attorney. It was assumed by the lone judge. An assumption isnt enough even for cases where its allegations can be feelings based. This was also a unique case because its never been used before like this. The are no other case files to refer to.

The bank's testimony was that all was within reality and theyd do it again.

Technically the bank should have stood as a co-accused for conspiracy to commit a fraud and fraud along with Trump LLC.

This will get tossed in appeal.

You're welcome.

Maybe we can start a Go Fuck Me to send you here for summer if your mom says its okay.

1000013637.jpg
 
Last edited: