...riffing off of another thread....James' seizing property....

[Lisa558]

No. Their are no penalties. (From the same link).

Where, 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 ofthe ill- gotten gains
is immaterial.


Trump is simply paying back what his fraudulent activities garnered him...plus appropriate interest.

How much of the fraudulently obtained money do you think Trump should get to keep.

I don't know how many others have been convicted of fraud but here are some...

Survey of Past New York Felony Prosecutions for Falsifying Business Records

A survey of years of New York criminal cases, which shows that the prosecution of falsifying business records in first degree is common.

www.justsecurity.org

You ignored my question: how many other people has any law officer gone after for doing the same thing? It’s certainly not an uncommon situation where people overstate their assets.

Why are you more concerned about a civil infraction in which there were no damages, and no victim, when Biden has been identified as The Big Guy collecting his 10% from foreign enemies, and now is compromised? No wonder he let the Chinese Spy Balloon take photos of our military bases!

I prefer a president who has America’s best interests in mind, not those of Communists.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

So, get the cash first.

mea culpa? that^ is the very foundation of socialism...as I have been saying that is what the socialists are really after

And if that is not enough.....go for the most profitable/easily managed pieces.

Anyway, if I was sitting in the decision-maker's seat......I'd look first at those avenues.

it will never be enough

You?

I'm in the "told ya so" camp chi-co, it was so obvious that the money is what you white liberals are after, ya just needed to put a minority face on it.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Here is what I could possibly envision:

1. Trump refuses to pay on Monday. In short, challenging the State to back up the threat to seize assets.
   
   
   
2. So, the State begins to seize. But they don't go after iconic 'Trump Tower'...with the public-'splashiness' that would entail. Nor do they go after all assets.
3. Instead they go after less well-known properties. But those that are known to be profitable. The more profitable the more likely to be seized. Of course, the details and messiness of managing any real-estate property will be part of the calculus too. After all, who wants to immerse themselves in the weeds of 'Tee-Times' and golf-cart maintenance?
   
   
   
4. So then, the State could most likely go after this 'stated' $400,000,000+ in cash (or cash equivalents) that Don Trump revealed he had in a deposition to the State in 2023. THOSE funds would be relatively easily secured.....just order the bank to lock the accounts, and turn the cash over to the State Treasurer or Court, whichever is applicable. Minimum 'hands-on management' of that cash would be required. Most certainly a lot less than seizing an office building with it's tenants, tax-generation burden, and maintenance.

And that is just the starting gate chi-co, eventually every successful entity will fall prey.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

What do you think of the suggestion that the State will go after the most profitable and easily managed real estate ......if the $400+ million in cash ain't really there?

Thats been the game plan all along.

 

[Lisa558]

After seeing both Fani Willis and Lucretia James in action, I will be very careful not to get on the bad side of a black woman who feels emboldened by the affirmative action favoritism showed her. Both got their positions, and probably their admission to their law schools, due to their being female blacks.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

mea culpa? that^ is the very foundation of socialism...

No it isn't. You have no idea what that word means.

 

[whitehall]

You have to wonder about lefties who spend time trying to figure out how the former president can pay an outrageous fine levied by liberal judges when it's easy to see that it is a fascist attempt by democrats to influence a presidential election.

 

[Catsnmeters]

You ignored my question: how many other people has any law officer gone after for doing the same thing? It’s certainly not an uncommon situation where people overstate their assets.

No I didn't.

I provided a link to some examples of cases people were convicted of the same crime in my last post.

You missed it?

Can I assume you aren't really reading my posts?

Why are you more concerned about a civil infraction in which there were no damages, and no victim, when Biden has been identified as The Big Guy collecting his 10% from foreign enemies, and now is compromised? No wonder he let the Chinese Spy Balloon take photos of our military bases!

This isn't about Biden. Please stay on topic.

I prefer a president who has America’s best interests in mind, not those of Communists.

Me too but not sure how that is relevant to Trump's fraud.

Why are you deflecting?

 

[Chillicothe]

"...pay an outrageous fine levied..."

"outrageous fine"????

Ummm, I don't think so.
Rather, it is merely 'disgorgement'.
A claw-back of ill-gotten gains.

 

[Lisa558]

"outrageous fine"????

Ummm, I don't think so.
Rather, it is merely 'disgorgement'.
A claw-back of ill-gotten gains.

The bank agreed to the terms and didn’t ask for anything. And the state of NY was not damaged and isn’t entitled to a rich man’s money just because the libs are out for blood.

If the NYSC doesn’t do what’s right here, then it will go to the SCOTUS, which will protect President Trump’s constitutional rights.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The bank agreed to the terms and didn’t ask for anything. And the state of NY was not damaged and isn’t entitled to a rich man’s money just because the libs are out for blood.

If the NYSC doesn’t do what’s right here, then it will go to the SCOTUS, which will protect President Trump’s constitutional rights.

Sorry, there is no constitutional right to conduct business in a persistent fraudulent and illegal manner.

And yes, lying on legal documents to inflate net worth to get lower rates is illegal.

WW

 

[Lisa558]

Sorry, there is no constitutional right to conduct business in a persistent fraudulent and illegal manner.

And yes, lying on legal documents to inflate net worth to get lower rates is illegal.

WW

Nobody who did that and caused no actual damages has ever been prosecuted. Only Trump. For political reasons.

The Wicked Witch needs to be disbarred, and Judge Dracula needs to be stripped of his judicial powers.

 

[Chillicothe]

which will protect President Trump’s constitutional rights.

--------------------------------------------
To the best of my knowledge, American citizens do not have a 'constitutional right' to lie in their business transactions, most especially when dealing with governmental bodies on the other side of the bargaining table.


So, prolific poster Lisa, try this approach:

• Did he lie?
• Did he profit by his lies?
• Were competitors in the bidding process harmed by him having an unfair advantage based on his lies?

Look, mi amiga, you gotta think beyond the banks. There are other injured parties here.

Did you do your expected due diligence? Didja even do a google search?

 

[Chillicothe]

Here is a taster of today's reportage from Politico concerning some issues around New York and Trump's assets:


--------------------------------------------

".....James likely wouldn’t start by targeting his real estate holdings, said legal experts. She is more likely to begin by seizing his bank accounts, which would give her direct access to cash, rather than an asset she would need to liquidate.

Of course, seizing Trump’s bank accounts is unlikely to produce enough cash to satisfy the full judgment — Trump’s lack of liquidity is precisely the reason he’s struggling to post the bond in the first place. On Friday, Trump claimed on social media that he has almost $500 million in cash, but in court filings, his lawyers have made clear that he lacks the cash to satisfy the judgment.

After going after Trump’s bank accounts, James would likely then move on to seizing either Trump’s personal property — planes, cars, jewelry, artwork — or real estate, such as Trump Tower, 40 Wall Street or the Trump National Doral golf resort.

James isn’t limited to seizing assets that were the subject of her office’s lawsuit against Trump. She can seek to seize almost any assets owned by Trump and the other defendants (including his two adult sons), even assets located in other states or other countries, depending on the nature of a country’s treaty with the United States."

 

[Lisa558]

--------------------------------------------
To the best of my knowledge, American citizens do not have a 'constitutional right' to lie in their business transactions, most especially when dealing with governmental bodies on the other side of the bargaining table.


So, prolific poster Lisa, try this approach:

• Did he lie?
• Did he profit by his lies?
• Were competitors in the bidding process harmed by him having an unfair advantage based on his lies?

Look, mi amiga, you gotta think beyond the banks. There are other injured parties here.

Did you do your expected due diligence? Didja even do a google search?

He did the same thing that others do at his position, and everyone is happy: the borrowers get their loans and the lenders make a mint.

When has anyone been fined like this for a case with no damages, and no victim? This is a clear money grab, intended to empty Trump’s pockets so he can‘t find his campaign with his own money.

Why should the state of NY get $400 million of Trump’s money? They lost nothing and had no damages.

 

[Catsnmeters]

He did the same thing that others do at his position, and everyone is happy: the borrowers get their loans and the lenders make a mint.

When has anyone been fined like this for a case with no damages, and no victim? This is a clear money grab, intended to empty Trump’s pockets so he can‘t find his campaign with his own money.

Why should the state of NY get $400 million of Trump’s money? They lost nothing and had no damages.

Again.

Survey of Past New York Felony Prosecutions for Falsifying Business Records

A survey of years of New York criminal cases, which shows that the prosecution of falsifying business records in first degree is common.

www.justsecurity.org

 

[Chillicothe]

When has anyone been fined like this

Again......NOT a fine.

A disgorgement of ill-gotten gains.
A claw-back.

Why should Don Trump profit from his lying to business partners and to governement negotiators?

 

[Lisa558]

Again......NOT a fine.

A disgorgement of ill-gotten gains.
A claw-back.

Why should Don Trump profit from his lying to business partners and to governement negotiators?

What government negotiators? This is a case involving a bank, and they knowingly entered into the contract - fully aware of the value of Trump’s triplex. They landed a whale and made $100 million. They weren’t fooled, and the application itself suggested the bank due its due diligence.

It’s the way things are done at that level. That’s why Kevin O’Leary is clearing out of NY. If they’re going to go on a witch-hunt against wealthy businessmen, he wants out. Other businesses will follow suit.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What government negotiators?

The ones in charge of overseeing his businesses. The ones he tried to scam by moving properties out of Florida. The ones he possibly lied to about his cash reserves.

 

[Concerned American]

In a nearby thread (revived from years ago)...the thread 'Why Trump Should Not Be President', there is post #13 that offers a headline suggesting that Trump won't pay on Monday, March 25th the money he owes for pursuing an appeal of the $450,000,000+ judgement against his corporation, himself, and his two sons.

The headline suggests that instead of paying he'll simply let the State of New York seize Trump Tower.

Personally, I'm not so sure that is the way it would play out.
But, if he refuses to pony up the bond money, what then?

[This could be a useful thread to inform us all on how the machinations of big money, big court judgements, can possibly play out. It'll be a high-stakes chess game, IMO. Most especially, if no financial-angel drops in to fund the surety bond(s). And USMB may have informed contributors here who are familiar with such judgments and are willing to share their insights?]

I welcome other's opinions on how this can play out this upcoming week.

Here is what I could possibly envision:

1. Trump refuses to pay on Monday. In short, challenging the State to back up the threat to seize assets.
   
   
   
2. So, the State begins to seize. But they don't go after iconic 'Trump Tower'...with the public-'splashiness' that would entail. Nor do they go after all assets.
3. Instead they go after less well-known properties. But those that are known to be profitable. The more profitable the more likely to be seized. Of course, the details and messiness of managing any real-estate property will be part of the calculus too. After all, who wants to immerse themselves in the weeds of 'Tee-Times' and golf-cart maintenance?
   
   
   
4. So then, the State could most likely go after this 'stated' $400,000,000+ in cash (or cash equivalents) that Don Trump revealed he had in a deposition to the State in 2023. THOSE funds would be relatively easily secured.....just order the bank to lock the accounts, and turn the cash over to the State Treasurer or Court, whichever is applicable. Minimum 'hands-on management' of that cash would be required. Most certainly a lot less than seizing an office building with it's tenants, tax-generation burden, and maintenance.

So, get the cash first. And if that is not enough.....go for the most profitable/easily managed pieces.

Anyway, if I was sitting in the decision-maker's seat......I'd look first at those avenues.

You?

Good luck with that. I would speculate that, if he has the $500M that he claims, it is off shore where James would not be able to touch it.