TRUMP Bond in Letita James Case Lowered by Appeals Court

They were wrong again, again. Whats that 0 for like 147 now?

HA HA

a reply to: chr0naut

The case isn't finished until all Due Process is exhausted. We'll know in a year or so.

The Swarms will be all gone by then. 😀

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: chr0naut

It took all of 2 seconds for them to hack a whopping 63% of that fine off.
They know it’s all a bogus.
There was no crime committed.
That law was never meant nor used the way it ever was when they went after Trump with it.

You see all these cases against Trump going to crap.
News flash…. They were crap from the beginning LoL

To be more accurate, they hacked 63% off of the illegal bond that was designed to prevent him from being able to appeal. Technically the fine is still due, unless it gets overturned on appeal.

It should end up getting overturned, quite clearly, since everyone knows this is literally just a hurt feelings tax and the judgement is unconstitutional.

I'm not confident the NY legal system can be trusted to overturn the hurt feelings tax though because a lot of people desperately needed it.

Maybe it has to go to the SCOTUS to get fixed.

a reply to: arcticshuffle

People aren't seeing how Trump just got them to lower the Appeal Bond by saying he couldn't get $550 Million cash. 😀He got em. Also the Appeals Court knows the Initial Judgement won't stand. It'll be lowered to a few million if it's not reversed altogether. And they also know big businesses have insurance too. But nothing gets covered until all due process is exhausted. 😃

a reply to: chr0naut

You and 7 Billion other People have no idea how much cash Trump has. He just convinced a Court he doesn't have $550 Million to place in Bond escrow. 🤣🤣

a reply to: chr0naut

The judgement was to recover money that Trump stole by fraudulent misrepresentation.

How did he steal anything ?

He asked the bank for money. They agreed and gave him the money. He paid it back, plus interest.


Where is the fraud ?

Just came by to read the abysmal responses from our resident socialist sycophants. Not surprised in the slightest.

"Socialism is the gospel of envy, and the creed of ignorance."
-Winston Churchill

It's almost as if they WANT AND NEED to have our lives destroyed, our families ripped apart, our wealth redistributed, our sovereignty eliminated, our strength diminished, our judicial weaponized...

🤔..Oh, wait.....

originally posted by: VariedcodeSole
Just came by to read the abysmal responses from our resident socialist sycophants. Not surprised in the slightest.

"Socialism is the gospel of envy, and the creed of ignorance."
-Winston Churchill

It's almost as if they WANT AND NEED to have our lives destroyed, our families ripped apart, our wealth redistributed, our sovereignty eliminated, our strength diminished, our judicial weaponized...

🤔..Oh, wait.....

The commies are upset. They wanted him to have to pay for 2 reasons:

1. He's rich.
2. He hurt their feelings.

a reply to: xuenchen

I think he wrote a book called the "The Art of the....."

a reply to: DAVID64

Because it's racist....

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: chr0naut

He was found guilty of fraud. Nothing to do with 'feelz'.

No. a judgement was handed down stating he misrepresented the value of a property. No fraud. No conviction.

Misrepresentation of the value of a property in a financial transaction is fraud.

It was also a civil court, not a criminal court.

The judgement was to recover money that Trump stole by fraudulent misrepresentation.

Recover for who? A loan was provided after vetting from the institution who gave it. It was paid in full on time with interest.

The institution which gave him the loan, did not own the money it gave.

It is a bank, that manages the money of its customers and investors. The customers and investors are the ones who get 'stiffed' in fraud of this type.

And the loan may have been repaid on time, but it is usual with high finance fraud to take out further loans (based on the security established in previous loans) so it's easy to hide the true values of things by compounding the fraud.

And you can't go back and admit to earlier fraud, or the house of cards all falls down.

Trump's businesses are based upon fraud.

The bond was the sentence that was handed down because he committed fraud. It didn't prevent him from appealing, because the new fine was determined by appeal, that he would have immediately lodged when his sentence was passed. He can still re-appeal, but he has used up one of his chances already.

The bond would allow him to appeal.

No, he had already appealed, as soon as the verdict came down. The bond was the fine he got for being found guilty of fraud.

The judgement in his appeal reduced the amount he was required to pay, and increased the time he had to pay it.

And the reason for the judgement was probably because they wanted to at least get some money back. Trump simply couldn't pay that amount because his representation of how much money he had in cash was also fraudulent.

No sentencing. A non-trial judgement made before listening to evidence. His fine is the same, but a higher level court sees that the judgement is absurd. So, they are allowing less to secure his case moving forward. Once that is done she cannot take any property or impose liens.

Civil court does not seek to criminally convict, but rather to recover funds and compensate victims (which in this case were the customers and investors of the bank).

He has used up nothing. This is to allow him to appeal the entire case. Two different things.

In the US, the only way to create new money is for congress to request it from the Reserve bank.

People can't just generate money from the air either by defrauding everyone, or by counterfeiting.

If such were possible, how could the government prevent hyperinflation?

Fair move from the appellate court... lowering the downpayment to 1/3 of the total, in order for the appeals to continue.

He owes over $500m back to the people, $175m is about a third of that, and serves as a downpayment. If the appeal does not play out in his favor, he has to add on another $350m, or so, to make good. If he doesn't, the $175m is taken and then they have that much less they need to take as foreclosures or seized bank assets at that time.

He should get a chance to defend himself and exhaust the appeals process, and mitigating the punishment amount in the meantime is reasonable. He proved through the court appointed monitor that he doesn't have the money to pay it in full and the court has asked for proof that no one will finance him. It would appear both those things are now verified and his downpayment got lowered.

And that is very fair. If he can't put up the money and has proven so to the court, he should pay what he can to stall off foreclosures. We would all expect this treatment, it's only fair.

eta: Important to note that the interest on the WHOLE amount is being calculated, however, something like $112,000 per day. So even though he is putting up a downpayment, the whole punishment is basis for interest. If the appeals should go on for another year, for example, the additional interest accrued is an additional $41 million per year. Two years of appeals -- an extra $80 million, on top of the $454m.

a reply to: chr0naut

In the US, the only way to create new money is for congress to request it from the Reserve bank.

Lulz.

K, I'm not even going to go there, but happy frolicking in LA-LA Land, enjoy! 😄

a reply to: chr0naut

It is a bank, that manages the money of its customers and investors. The customers and investors are the ones who get 'stiffed' in fraud of this type.

The bank did their due diligence and approved the loan.
You’re saying the bank committed fraud as well. Got it. 👍

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

The case isn't finished until all Due Process is exhausted. We'll know in a year or so.

The Swarms will be all gone by then. 😀

What case will put Trump in jail before November? Asking for a liberal friend.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: chr0naut

You and 7 Billion other People have no idea how much cash Trump has. He just convinced a Court he doesn't have $550 Million to place in Bond escrow. 🤣🤣

He convinced me, too.

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: chr0naut

It is a bank, that manages the money of its customers and investors. The customers and investors are the ones who get 'stiffed' in fraud of this type.

The bank did their due diligence and approved the loan.
You’re saying the bank committed fraud as well. Got it. 👍

Well, that's hard to say. The bank officers could well have been complicit in the fraud, but they have plausible deniability. The valuers that the bank engaged were likely to have been complicit with the fraud, and the bank could be unaware that the valuers, or even specific officers of the bank, were crooked.

originally posted by: Mahogani
Fair move from the appellate court... lowering the downpayment to 1/3 of the total, in order for the appeals to continue.

He owes over $500m back to the people, $175m is about a third of that, and serves as a downpayment. If the appeal does not play out in his favor, he has to add on another $350m, or so, to make good. If he doesn't, the $175m is taken and then they have that much less they need to take as foreclosures or seized bank assets at that time.

He should get a chance to defend himself and exhaust the appeals process, and mitigating the punishment amount in the meantime is reasonable. He proved through the court appointed monitor that he doesn't have the money to pay it in full and the court has asked for proof that no one will finance him. It would appear both those things are now verified and his downpayment got lowered.

And that is very fair. If he can't put up the money and has proven so to the court, he should pay what he can to stall off foreclosures. We would all expect this treatment, it's only fair.

eta: Important to note that the interest on the WHOLE amount is being calculated, however, something like $112,000 per day. So even though he is putting up a downpayment, the whole punishment is basis for interest. If the appeals should go on for another year, for example, the additional interest accrued is an additional $41 million per year. Two years of appeals -- an extra $80 million, on top of the $454m.

YES.

He still owes the full amount.

Curious: if he wins his appeal — who pays the interest charges?

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: xuenchen

I think he wrote a book called the "The Art of the....."

Tony Schwartz wrote The Art of the Deal.

Donald Trump’s Ghostwriter Tells All

Tony Schwartz also wrote this: A Different kind of Donald Trump Story

And then there's this article on Trump's business acumen: Trump, the Bad, Bad Businessman

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: chr0naut

He was found guilty of fraud. Nothing to do with 'feelz'.

No. a judgement was handed down stating he misrepresented the value of a property. No fraud. No conviction.

Misrepresentation of the value of a property in a financial transaction is fraud.

It was also a civil court, not a criminal court.

The judgement was to recover money that Trump stole by fraudulent misrepresentation.

Recover for who? A loan was provided after vetting from the institution who gave it. It was paid in full on time with interest.

The institution which gave him the loan, did not own the money it gave.

It is a bank, that manages the money of its customers and investors. The customers and investors are the ones who get 'stiffed' in fraud of this type.

And the loan may have been repaid on time, but it is usual with high finance fraud to take out further loans (based on the security established in previous loans) so it's easy to hide the true values of things by compounding the fraud.

And you can't go back and admit to earlier fraud, or the house of cards all falls down.

Trump's businesses are based upon fraud.

The bond was the sentence that was handed down because he committed fraud. It didn't prevent him from appealing, because the new fine was determined by appeal, that he would have immediately lodged when his sentence was passed. He can still re-appeal, but he has used up one of his chances already.

The bond would allow him to appeal.

No, he had already appealed, as soon as the verdict came down. The bond was the fine he got for being found guilty of fraud.

The judgement in his appeal reduced the amount he was required to pay, and increased the time he had to pay it.

And the reason for the judgement was probably because they wanted to at least get some money back. Trump simply couldn't pay that amount because his representation of how much money he had in cash was also fraudulent.

No sentencing. A non-trial judgement made before listening to evidence. His fine is the same, but a higher level court sees that the judgement is absurd. So, they are allowing less to secure his case moving forward. Once that is done she cannot take any property or impose liens.

Civil court does not seek to criminally convict, but rather to recover funds and compensate victims (which in this case were the customers and investors of the bank).

He has used up nothing. This is to allow him to appeal the entire case. Two different things.

In the US, the only way to create new money is for congress to request it from the Reserve bank.

People can't just generate money from the air either by defrauding everyone, or by counterfeiting.

If such were possible, how could the government prevent hyperinflation?

When you put your money in a bank for whatever benefit it may get you, you have no say in what they do with it. As fiduciaries, they have already guaranteed to not do stupid things with it, but they are not required to get permission or announce what they do with the money.

The bank is the “owner” of the money for the purpose of making their own profits as they satisfy any obligations to the depositors.

Depositors are not stockholders. They don’t own anything or have any “rights” or “involvement”. If banks were required to involve 20,000 - 100,000 depositors in all of their private investing, there would be be no banks.

It’s funny, when someone asked earlier who the victims were, I jokingly said you’d be by to announce “everyone!!”. You definitely didn’t disappoint.