The Verdict

The US constitution has this thing called the Separation of Powers which has three branches: 'legislative' where the politicians make the laws; 'executive' where the president executes the law; and 'judicial' where lawyers and judges interpret the law.

The reason that the power is split into three branches is so no one person, or group has total power. It's designed so power is not misused and democracy is maintained in the interests of serving the people.

Politics is not a bunch of idiots bitchin' about each other, power grabbing for their own gratification/profit, or showing off revenge porn in public in a bid to score points.

Whilst I'm more than interested in the outcome of the Supreme Court's consideration of 14/3, this is off topic. I will reserve my own personal opinion about Trump's disqualification, or otherwise until I've heard the legal arguments.

This blog is about the verdict in the NY civil fraud case.

Can we agree that there was a civil fraud case against Trump, his associates and the Trump Organisation?

Can we agree that there was a verdict in this civil case?

Can we agree that msm reported the verdict truthfully, except for some inaccuracies/confusion in the first rush to get the news in the public domain?

Can we agree that I relayed the verdict truthfully, fairly accurately and corrected myself where I made mistakes?

Can we agree that the disgorgement amounted to $364M, some $355M against Trump and the Trump Organisation, $4M each against Don jr and Eric Trump and $1M each against Alan Weiselberg and the other associate who's name escapes me? Can we agree that this is most of the $370M the prosecution requested, but not all?

Can we agree that when Judge Arthur Engoron made his initial summary judgement he ruled that there was persistent, widespread fraud in the Trump Organisation and that it should be dissolved? Can we agree that Team Trump moved to appeal the dissolution ruling?

Can we agree Judge Engoron's final ruling bypassed the immediate dissolution of the Trump Organisation and instead extended the tenure of the independent monitor Barbara Jones for a further three years, as well as instituting a compliance officer for the same period? Can we agree that the power to dissolve the Trump Organisation has been transferred to Barbara Jones should she deem it necessary in the future?

Can we agree that in not calling for the immediate dissolution of the Trump Organisation, Team Trump's appeal to stop the dissolution is no longer relevant?

Can we agree that Judge Engoron revoked Trump's business licence for three years and Don jr's and Erics for two, rather than issuing a lifetime ban from conducting business in NY as the prosecution requested?

Is there anything you would like me to explain out of that lot?

That explains why you're so behind and keep repeating stuff from ages ago.

So you disagree that the NY civil fraud case against Trump, his associates and the Trump Organisation took place?

If a single judge can go after Trump then the rest of the business men who ply the same tactics had better be ready. And that goes for Obiden too. I am sure Florida and Texas would welcome Trumps corporation with open arms. Leave New York city to the illegals.

This blog is about the verdict against Trump, his associates and the Trump Organisation in the NY civil fraud case.

So, let's not start with your off-topic wanking material, eh?

Yes, because those tactics are fraudulent.

We tend to think of victims as individuals who have been traumatised and ruined, so this is a good spin.

However, financial fraud is still financial fraud regardless of whether individuals were directly and obviously traumatised, or ruined.

We also don't know how things may have turned out had Trump not committed financial fraud, nor the consequences had something gone horribly wrong and Trump couldn't pay back the loans because he lied about his ability to do so. Pulling off a scam without obvious damage is not the same as responsible, ethical and law abiding business practise.

Certainly, The ex-president's fraudulent behaviour has had an impact on how NY business and the presidency is perceived. That scepticism and distrust in the public domain would likely be far greater had the US shrugged it's shoulders and said, "Meh, that's how we roll."

But hey, let's see 'how you roll' works on appeal given Team Trump's less than astute lawyering has already been rejected - assuming Trump can raise the cash, or financial backing to rehash the same arguments having been adjudicated a fraud.

And let's face it, even when there is a direct victim, as in the case of Trump being an adjudicated rapist, you don't appear to give a flying feck.

You can't really have it both ways and expect to have any credibility with the grown-ups.

The upper corrupt class...?

Like the privileged from birth, ex-president, multi-billionaire businessman, adjudicated financial fraud and adjudicated rapist who you call the King, Donald Trump?

How does it get more upper class and corrupt without being an actual bastard king, or dictator which he's clearly greedy for?

Do you really think a diet of burgers and verbal trash diarrhoea makes him an honest, working class man?

Perhaps you're muddling being of a class and having class.

The difference is, you can't heavily edit what I say to suit your misogyny except in your own head.

Why couldn't you bring yourself to admit all the facts that I listed earlier, starting with 'a civil fraud trial against Trump took place'?

Why did you feel the need to edit that in your head as if the list was merely my unsubstantiated opinions?

If you had any sense you'd maybe see an argument for your own cause in that list, rather than trying to make it disappear, or patronise and belittle me.

I'd continue trying to help you out, but why should I play nicely after the above post?

You have no argument and I'm not going to give you one to misuse given your lack of integrity.

The summary judgement only addressed one of eight counts.

Although it was the bulk of the charges, I'm pretty sure there were seven other fraud charges that were a part of the case and the final disgorgement award.

Then there were the discrepancies highlighted by Barbara Jones in her letter to the court as requested by the court just before the close of evidentiary hearing.

It's also been left open for review by Judge Engoron as Barbara Jones continues to monitor the Trump Organisation.

I think I've got that right.

If vile, misogynist, bitchin' little videos are what you have to offer to the people you claim to love, lord help your enemies.

You are still missing the point about the verdict.

It's not about admitting to me that you acknowledge Trump committed fraud, it's about the position this verdict has put Trump in.

Another aspect of the ruling is that Judge Engoron rehabilitated Michael Cohen after Team Trump argued he lacked credibility as a witness due to him previously perjuring himself.

Engoron stated that Cohen was comfortable in his testimony and not only appeared truthful in his demeanour, but his evidence was corroborated by other witnesses, documents and evidentiary material.

That's significant given Cohen will obviously be a central witness in Trump's first criminal trial, the Stormy Daniels hush money case.

Also, Alan Weiselberg is in the process of working out a plea having perjured himself in this civil fraud trial. Weiselberg is under pressure given he's an octogenarian and has already spent 100 days in Rikers Island for perjury. A second felony perjury sentence is going to attract a much longer sentence.

Cohen has testified that nothing happened in the Trump Organisation without Alan Weiselberg, or himself knowing about it. The question is, will Weiselberg now flip and testify against Trump in the upcoming felony fraud trial?