Trump ordered to pay over $350M for business fraud

A "Bill of Attainder"? LOL! Why not just call it a crayfish? You obviously don't have the foggiest notion what it means.

 

That Trump is a POS who does stupid ****. And it was hardly "strained".

 

Who cares? The Gov. isn't doing any "damage control", just laughing off loonytunes claims. Besides, what can the governor do anyway? Nada.

 

Citizens and taxpayers of New York care.

 

They already hate Trump, at least that's what Trumpies say.

Is the state collapsing now or something?

 

James:

"Trump is a POS who does stupid ****. On a completely unrelated note, I'm also running as a candidate for Attorney General of New York."

Is that what you think she said?

 

I'm bored with this back and forth. I think you're arguing to argue at this point.

James did not communicate that she thinks Trump does "stupid ****". She communicated that she thinks he committed criminal acts in NY that she will prosecute as a state attorney general to remove him from Federal office.

James' statements in her campaign ad:

"I'm running for Attorney General because I will never be afraid to challenge this illegitimate president when our fundamental rights are at stake."
"He should be charged with obstructing justice."
"I believe that the president of these United States can be indicted for criminal offenses."
"We would join with law enforcement and other attorneys general across this nation in removing this president from office"
"We can only do it if all of you exercise your most fundamental right; a right that is basic to democracy, and that is the right to vote."

Summary: I'm not afraid to fight Trump. I will charge Trump with criminal offenses. This is how I and others will remove Trump from office if you vote for me.

TLDR: Elect me and I will get Trump.

How else would a state Attorney General remove a Federal official from office? Is the ability to remove someone from federal office a democratic state attorney general power? What happens to the most basic fundamental right to democracy for the voters that put the president in office?

 

Why don't you cherry pick a juicy quote from her that you think screams "vote for me and I'll get the Orange Sexoffender"?

PS she couldn't have done anything with those alleged crimes anyway. She's not the DOJ.

 

What purpose would that serve? Do you think she needs to utter those exact words in order to believe that she ran a campaign focused on the removal of Trump from office?

Also, if you believe I "cherry picked" her comments to convey some different meaning of her campaign ad, by all means provide the proper context using whatever you think I clipped.

 

Where's her promise to get Trump? You're the one who says she ran on that.

 

Is this really the best you can do at this point? Because it's not much of an argument against the case I presented you.

 

Is what she said much different than any other DA or attorney general running on going after criminals of any type, mob bosses, etc?
I've heard Attorney General Republican candidates in my state say similar things this week in ads on tv.

 

Directed toward one particular individual?

 

A montage of ads which don't include a promise to "get Trump" is the case you presented? Not much of a case. Besides, Trump's own behavior is what ended up "getting him", isn't it?

 

What about the Orange Analpolyp promising to go after Biden? To toss Hillary in prison?

https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...after-biden-if-former-president-wins-in-2024/

Anyhoo, this thread is about Trump getting pounded by a court in NY.

 

Trump is not a prosecutor.

 

Visit your own link.
Click "learn more" just under the text of the 8th amendment.
Scroll down to "Limitation to Criminal Punishments".
Click it and ...READ IT!

You'll see it says: "The Eighth Amendment deals only with criminal punishment, and has no application to civil processes".

 

And James isn’t a judge, and can’t prosecute federal crimes.

So it’s ok for a presidential candidate to promise to prosecute and imprison people?

 

To be fair, no, not directed at one individual.
I'm not saying that I particularly care for that kind of rhetoric, in fact, I don't like it, but it hardly disqualifies her. The danger in statements like that is that is undercuts any claim of being fair and open minded.
The bottom line is that it doesn't discount what Trump did.
Regardless of her poor choice of rhetoric, Trump did break the law in NY, had been doing it for years, bragged about it, and pissed off the authorities.
That will get you in trouble anywhere, and no matter who you are. Ask Murdaugh. I find it surprising that some don't seem to understand it, but here's the rub. It doesn't matter what a bunch of tv and internet pundits think about it, when it comes to the courtroom, the facts of the matter and the reality of what the accused did are what are important. In Trump's case, they had a whistleblower, tons of evidence and a law on the books to back it up.
Scream at the sky all day long and it won't change the facts.

 

She specifically named Trump.

 

This isn't a federal crime. Arthur has been gunning for Trump since 2020. His ruling and fine clearly show his bias. He should have recused himself.

 

Well, duh. I know it's not a federal crime BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I JUST POSTED! Do you not read posts?

Engoron's decision is based upon application of the law to the facts. PERIOD.

You'd know that if you had read the decision.

 

James and Engoron manufactured a "crime" using a consumer fraud law which in all 12 cases in which significant fines were levied required victims and damages.

 

The fantastic thing about MAGA is that your conspiracy always has more and more people as Trump loses his cases.

If the appeal of the judgment is rejected, the appeal court judge will be as corrupt as Engoron.

 

Wrong… it was decided by the SCOTUS