Democrat Appellate Judge overturns half billion dollar fine

[A2SG]

In a liberal State with a liberal judge and a liberal AG who ran on getting Trump...yep nothing to see here!

Are you claiming the jury was 100% comprised of liberals who were all out to get Trump? Despite the fact that Trump's legal team had just as much input on selecting that jury as the prosecution had?

Seriously?

Don't forget, the jury rendered the verdict. Not the AG, not the judge, not the state of New York itself.

No James declared Trump guilty before there even was a case! That is how witch hunts work!

Her belief in his guilt was proven, supported by evidence. Convincing evidence, enough to make the jury sure beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump was guilty.

I notice you keep ignoring that evidence. Why is that?

-- A2SG, could it be that it invalidates your belief in Trump's innocence....

 

[DaisyDay]

Are you claiming the jury was 100% comprised of liberals who were all out to get Trump? Despite the fact that Trump's legal team had just as much input on selecting that jury as the prosecution had?

Seriously?

Don't forget, the jury rendered the verdict. Not the AG, not the judge, not the state of New York itself.

In this case, there was no jury because Trump's incompetent lawyer, Alina Habbab, failed to request one - it is not automatic as jury trials cost more than bench trials. Habbab also filed several lawsuits against the judge and the AG, but they all either failed or were dismissed.

Habba was later rewarded for her fealty by Trump appointing her as acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey despite NJ's senators, each a Democrat, blue slipped her with Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) supporting the blue slip tradition. Habbab has no prosecutorial experience whatsoever and the judges of the district voted her out. She, however refuses to leave. Trump has tried to appoint her as acting DA to extend her term as her term as interim DA ran out (Bondi fired the DA put in by the district judges).

Her belief in his guilt was proven, supported by evidence. Convincing evidence, enough to make the jury sure beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump was guilty.

I notice you keep ignoring that evidence. Why is that?

-- A2SG, could it be that it invalidates your belief in Trump's innocence....

The detailed indictment and subsequent verdict contain a plethora of evidence of Trump's guilt. Most of his fans can't argue that he didn't do it, so they argue it doesn't matter that he committed criminal fraud - however, the ones who won't look at the evidence manage to remain convinced of his innocence.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Are you claiming the jury was 100% comprised of liberals who were all out to get Trump?

Seriously?

Her belief in his guilt was proven, supported by evidence. Convincing evidence, enough to make the jury sure beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump was guilty.

Did I? No. In this country you are SUPPOSED to be innocent until proven guilty. She ran on that he was guilty before there was even a case...witch hunt! Who rendered the judgement? The jury?

 

[Say it aint so]

SHE DID single him out BEFORE any guilt or conviction...she ran on it.

If Trump is being charged with fraud crimes and is sued by the state just like thousand of others who have also been sued; then he is not being singled out. Did she run on that? Yes. No different than Trump ran on locking Hillary up.

 

[A2SG]

In this case, there was no jury because Trump's incompetent lawyer, Alina Habbab, failed to request one - it is not automatic as jury trials cost more than bench trials. Habbab also filed several lawsuits against the judge and the AG, but they all either failed or were dismissed.

Habba was later rewarded for her fealty by Trump appointing her as acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey despite NJ's senators, each a Democrat, blue slipped her with Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) supporting the blue slip tradition. Habbab has no prosecutorial experience whatsoever and the judges of the district voted her out. She, however refuses to leave. Trump has tried to appoint her as acting DA to extend her term as her term as interim DA ran out (Bondi fired the DA put in by the district judges).

The detailed indictment and subsequent verdict contain a plethora of evidence of Trump's guilt. Most of his fans can't argue that he didn't do it, so they argue it doesn't matter that he committed criminal fraud - however, the ones who won't look at the evidence manage to remain convinced of his innocence.

Right, right. James prosecuted the civil fraud trial, it was Bragg who prosecuted the criminal fraud trial.

-- A2SG, so much fraud to be guilty of, it's hard to keep track!

 

[A2SG]

Did I? No. In this country you are SUPPOSED to be innocent until proven guilty. She ran on that he was guilty before there was even a case...witch hunt! Who rendered the judgement? The jury?

And Trump was presumed innocent until he was proven guilty in a court of law. Again, that's how it works.

Yes, James believed Trump was guilty. I don't know what evidence she had before she ran, but she did form that opinion, and she voiced it. You did notice Trump wasn't sentenced the second she uttered that opinion, didn't you? She still had to prove it.

And she did. The appeals court may have tossed the judgment, but not the verdict.

Trump is still guilty of fraud.

-- A2SG, just as he is in several other fraud cases as well, including 34 felony criminal fraud convictions....

 

[A2SG]

If Trump is being charged with fraud crimes and is sued by the state just like thousand of others who have also been sued; then he is not being singled out. Did she run on that? Yes. No different than Trump ran on locking Hillary up.

It should be noted that James made good on her campaign promise. Unlike...

-- A2SG, what was that guy's name again?

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

And Trump was presumed innocent until he was proven guilty in a court of law. Again, that's how it works.

Yes, James believed Trump was guilty.

And she did. The appeals court may have tossed the judgment, but not the verdict.

Well no, he was presumed GUILTY before the trail. She said it PUBLICLY. The only thing she proved was that she could get Trump in a liberal State with a liberal judge. Railroaded! The verdict will tossed out too...

 

[A2SG]

Well no, he was presumed GUILTY before the trail. She said it PUBLICLY.

She may have held that opinion, but that would have just been her opinion. Nothing more. Again, note that no one ruled Trump guilty on her say so alone. She had to prove it in a court of law, with evidence, before his guilt was determined.

And she did that.

You keep ignoring the evidence. Why?

(Don't bother answering, we know why.)

The only thing she proved was that she could get Trump in a liberal State with a liberal judge. Railroaded!

How much of the evidence have you viewed? What part of it is false? Show your work, dude. Letitia James did, now it's your turn.

Further, if you are going to claim that Judge Engoron displayed bias in his judgment of the case, then you will have to prove that. If you wish to rely on the principle of presumption of innocence for Trump, then you need to apply the same standard for Judge Engoron. He's innocent of bias until you can prove otherwise.

What proof do you have that he displayed bias?

The verdict will tossed out too...

It has not been so far. If it is as obvious as you think, it certainly would have been.

It should also be noted that the reason why the appeals court tossed the judgment was because they viewed the amount as excessive, not due to the facts or merits of the case against Trump. In fact:

"[W]hile harm certainly occurred, it was not the cataclysmic harm that can justify a nearly half billion-dollar award to the State," two of the judges wrote.​

Further:

In the prevailing opinion, the judges wrote, “While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants’ business culture, the court’s disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”​

So, while the judgment may have been tossed, the verdict has not been. So the evidence that proved Trump's guilt stands.

For your information:

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/trump-decision.pdf

-- A2SG, easy to claim Trump was railroaded when you don't bother to actually view the evidence....

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

She may have held that opinion, but that would have just been her opinion. Nothing more.

It should also be noted that the reason why the appeals court tossed the judgment was because they viewed the amount as excessive, not due to the facts or merits of the case against Trump.
...nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

That type of thing said publicly was wrong. The Judgement WAS excessive...why was it? Engoron. Engoron's judgement VIOLATED the 8th Amendment! That IS bias!

 

[Pommer]

Well no, he was presumed GUILTY before the trail. She said it PUBLICLY. The only thing she proved was that she could get Trump in a liberal State with a liberal judge. Railroaded! The verdict will tossed out too...

Prosecutors should be certain that the people they have brought charges against are (in fact) guilty of said charges; saying it out loud in public is (get ready) “normal”.

 

[Pommer]

That type of thing said publicly was wrong. The Judgement WAS excessive...why was it? Engoron. Engoron's judgement VIOLATED the 8th Amendment! That IS bias!

And that was overturned, not, however, the conviction.

 

[A2SG]

That type of thing said publicly was wrong.

Why? Does she not have the right to voice her opinion, same as everyone else? And, further, she was running for AG, to be a prosecutor. Prosecutors get criminals convicted, that's the job. She was claiming she would do the job she was looking to be elected to do.

And she did.

The Judgement WAS excessive...why was it? Engoron. Engoron's judgement VIOLATED the 8th Amendment! That IS bias!

The appeals court ruled the amount was excessive, so I'm not going to dispute that. They are the arbiter of those decisions, not me. However, the judgment was not solely determined by Judge Engoron. It was a disgorgement, determined by the amount Trump and his organization gained through fraudulent activity:

[W]here, as here, there is a claim based on fraudulent activity, disgorgement may be available as an equitable remedy, notwithstanding the absence of loss to individuals or independent claims for restitution. Disgorgement is distinct from the remedy of restitution because it focuses on the gain to the wrongdoer as opposed to the loss to the victim. Thus, disgorgement aims to deter wrongdoing by preventing the wrongdoer from retaining ill-gotten gains from fraudulent conduct. Accordingly, the remedy of disgorgement does not require a showing or allegation of direct losses to consumers or the public; the source of the ill-gotten gains is “immaterial.”​

The specific amounts and basis for them are detailed in the decision, a link to which I provided earlier. Heck, here it is again:

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/trump-decision.pdf

How does that prove bias on the part of the judge? Remember, the appeals court did not toss the amount based on judicial bias, but simply that the amount was deemed excessive.

-- A2SG, so they do not seem to agree with you on the issue of bias....

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

And that was overturned, not, however, the conviction.

It likely will be

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Why? Does she not have the right to voice her opinion, same as everyone else?

The appeals court ruled the amount was excessive, so I'm not going to dispute that. They are the arbiter of those decisions, not me. However, the judgment was not solely determined by Judge Engoron.

How does that prove bias on the part of the judge? Remember, the appeals court did not toss the amount based on judicial bias, but simply that the amount was deemed excessive.

It is not professional at all and could bias things against him. She is NOT like everyone else....she is an AG. If Engoron wasn't biased then there would be no reason to rule it as excessive and against the Constitution! It was a witch hunt pure and simple.

 

[Pommer]

It likely will be

No, the verdict was upheld.
Would Trump gamble that SCOTUS would deign to hear the case?
(Is this case even eligible to seek certiorari?)

 

[Servus]

Literally thousands of people have been falsely / wrongfully convicted by US courts.
Trump happens to be one of them. In Trump's case he was given a meaningless sentence at the last minute. And then the monetary judgment against him was overturned. So don't be surprised if the technical felony conviction is overturned as well. Which seems more likely than not at this point.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

No, the verdict was upheld.

It will be thrown out too

 

[DaisyDay]

Literally thousands of people have been falsely / wrongfully convicted by US courts.

Generally, those people were not billionaires with a stable of lawyers on retainer, politically at or near the top of the food chain and with a gigantic bully pulpit.

Trump happens to be one of them.

Lols, not even close, just the opposite - he got cases dismissed simply because he got elected president and a ridiculously lenient sentence.

In Trump's case he was given a meaningless sentence at the last minute.

Exactly! Literally thousands of people are denied that privilege every day by US courts, but not our Donald John Trump.

And then the monetary judgment against him was overturned. So don't be surprised if the technical felony conviction is overturned as well. Which seems more likely than not at this point.

Extremely unlikely at this point, as every appeal on the charges has been dismissed.

 

[Pommer]

It will be thrown out too

In what court?