Laniakea
Not of this world
Your claim that Trump is "paying back ill gotten gains" has been refuted.
Moving the goalpost after your claim has been refuted doesn't work.
Get over it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Trump ordered to pay nearly 355 million in NY fraud case.
- Thread starter fantome profane
- Start date
Moving the goalpost after your claim has been refuted doesn't work.
Get over it.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Do some reading and you'll discover that you're wrong.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Already done. I've been on this forum for years.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Examples:
Posts (in this thread alone): 662, 665, 679, 683
And those are just yours.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
LOL The first one is me pointing out that I've already addressed your points, previously.
Look around some more. When people take the time to post long posts about their thoughts on a subject, I take the time to respond to as much as possible. You'll find a lot of really long posts from me around here.
Nice try though.
Now, let's get back to talking about Trump's fraud case.
Laniakea
Not of this world
(INSERT DISMISSIVE ONE-LINER HERE)LOL The first one is me pointing out that I've already addressed your points, previously.
Look around some more. When people take the time to post long posts about their thoughts on a subject, I take the time to respond to as much as possible. You'll find a lot of really long posts from me around here.
Nice try though.
Now, let's get back to talking about Trump's fraud case.
McBell
Unbound
Judge denies Trump request to post $100M bond instead of 'impossible' $464M penalty in N.Y. fraud case
Trump's attorneys said it would be "impossible" for him to put up the full amount without selling off some of his properties.
www.nbcnews.com
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
"Trump's attorneys said it would be "impossible" for him to put up the full amount without selling off some of his properties."Judge denies Trump request to post $100M bond instead of 'impossible' $464M penalty in N.Y. fraud case
Trump's attorneys said it would be "impossible" for him to put up the full amount without selling off some of his properties.
Then sell some properties. Full stop.
The Donald is in financial hot water.
finance.yahoo.com
www.the-express.com
Trump fails to secure bond for $454M judgment in civil fraud case as asset seizures loom
Donald Trump's efforts to secure a bond to cover a $454 million judgment in a New York civil fraud case has been rejected by 30 surety companies, his lawyers said on Monday, inching him closer to the possibility of having his properties seized. The former president must either pay the sum out...
Donald Trump could have his properties seized as he owes $454m in fraud case
Donald Trump has been ordered to pay $454 million in a civil fraud case brought by the state of New York, and the state's attorney general has warned she will seize his assets if he doesn't pay up.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Poor Lawyers, they have to explain to Donald that he doesn't get out of judgement just because he isn't really as rich as he pretends, he will just have to settle for the alternative of the government seizing his property.The Donald is in financial hot water.
Trump fails to secure bond for $454M judgment in civil fraud case as asset seizures loom
Donald Trump's efforts to secure a bond to cover a $454 million judgment in a New York civil fraud case has been rejected by 30 surety companies, his lawyers said on Monday, inching him closer to the possibility of having his properties seized. The former president must either pay the sum out...Donald Trump could have his properties seized as he owes $454m in fraud case
Donald Trump has been ordered to pay $454 million in a civil fraud case brought by the state of New York, and the state's attorney general has warned she will seize his assets if he doesn't pay up.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
Back in the 1980s, he was famous for forcing people out of their apartments in buildings he owned. He wanted to get rid of them because they were rent-stabilized and he wanted to raise the rents for those apartments. Now it looks like he'll be the one getting evicted.
Donald Trump was a nightmare landlord in the 1980s
Donald Trump was a nightmare landlord in the 1980s
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
He ruled against Trump. That's evidence enough, apparently.
Laniakea
Not of this world
It proves that the judgement was unconstitutional. Making a guy put up more money than is possible as bond as a precondition to appeal is excessive. The judge basically removed Trump's constitutional right to appeal the verdict.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
It proves no such thing.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Except it is not a fine. Once again it is a disgorgement. It is taking back ill gotten gains. A fine is a punishment. He could have been fined on top of the disgorgement, but it was judged that the disgorgement alone would do the job.
How the figures were determined are laid out in the judge's brief that I linked earlier. And here is a link on disgorgement:
Disgorgement: What it is and how it Works
Disgorgement is repayment of ill-gotten gains that is imposed on wrongdoers by the courts. Funds are paid back with interest to those affected.
"What Is Disgorgement?
Disgorgement is the legally mandated repayment of ill-gotten gains imposed on wrongdoers by the courts. Funds that were received through illegal or unethical business transactions are disgorged, or paid back, often with interest and/or penalties to those affected by the action.
Disgorgement is a remedial civil action, rather than punitive civil action. That means it seeks to make those harmed whole rather than to excessively punish wrong-doers."
This was not a fine. The USSC case does not apply.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And disgorgement has been upheld by the USSC. It does have limits put on it. It is not a tool of punishment. And that is why the judges figures are important. If you can show that the judges figures are wrong the amount could be lowered. But he seems to know far more about this than anyone here does. This is from a case involving the SEC. Stripping of ill gotten gains was allowed in this case, fines were not:
"On Monday, in an 8-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld—with some limits—the SEC’s ability to seek disgorgement of ill-gotten profits as an “equitable remedy” for securities law violations. Writing for the Court, Justice Sotomayor said that a disgorgement award is permissible under federal law if it is truly equitable. Disgorgement must therefore be limited to “net profits from wrongdoing after deducting legitimate expenses,” and should be returned to investors. These constraints depend on a fact-intensive and complex analysis, and ultimately will determine how disgorgement is used by the SEC going forward. "
www.crowell.com
So one more time, this is not a fine. There is a difference.
"On Monday, in an 8-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld—with some limits—the SEC’s ability to seek disgorgement of ill-gotten profits as an “equitable remedy” for securities law violations. Writing for the Court, Justice Sotomayor said that a disgorgement award is permissible under federal law if it is truly equitable. Disgorgement must therefore be limited to “net profits from wrongdoing after deducting legitimate expenses,” and should be returned to investors. These constraints depend on a fact-intensive and complex analysis, and ultimately will determine how disgorgement is used by the SEC going forward. "
Supreme Court Upholds SEC's Ability to Seek Disgorgement, With Limits
On Monday, in an 8-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld—with some limits—the SEC’s ability to seek disgorgement of ill-gotten profits as an “equitable remedy” for securities law violations.…
www.crowell.com
So one more time, this is not a fine. There is a difference.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Pay back? Are you claiming that the banks will be getting this money, even though they themselves testified they weren't defrauded?Except it is not a fine. Once again it is a disgorgement. It is taking back ill gotten gains. A fine is a punishment. He could have been fined on top of the disgorgement, but it was judged that the disgorgement alone would do the job.
How the figures were determined are laid out in the judge's brief that I linked earlier. And here is a link on disgorgement:
Disgorgement: What it is and how it Works
Disgorgement is repayment of ill-gotten gains that is imposed on wrongdoers by the courts. Funds are paid back with interest to those affected.www.investopedia.com
"What Is Disgorgement?
Disgorgement is the legally mandated repayment of ill-gotten gains imposed on wrongdoers by the courts. Funds that were received through illegal or unethical business transactions are disgorged, or paid back, often with interest and/or penalties to those affected by the action.
Disgorgement is a remedial civil action, rather than punitive civil action. That means it seeks to make those harmed whole rather than to excessively punish wrong-doers."
This was not a fine. The USSC case does not apply.
Latoya James will be disappointed.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, you have the wrong victims. This has been explained to you.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Can you even point out where the money that's being "paid back" is supposed to go?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
To others, yes. I can.