2 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Utter rubbish. The former disgraced guy is crooked as a dog's hind leg. These cases are based on FACTS, not the emotional attachment his sycophants have.

Really...President Trump wasn't even named as a defendant in this case ???? 

35 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Really...President Trump wasn't even named as a defendant in this case ???? 

Hard to dodge the fact it’s Trump’s businesses that have been found guilty.

 

 

 

49 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Really...President Trump wasn't even named as a defendant in this case ???? 

Don’t worry, I’m sure his name will start popping up in quite a few subpoenas and indictments soon enough.

1 hour ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Really...President Trump wasn't even named as a defendant in this case ???? 

As an obvious supporter of the disgraced 45, you must either admit you are aware of the traitor's sociopathic need to have his fingers intimately in all his workings, or that you just don't understand his treasonous workings. He owned the company, the buck stops there.

8 hours ago, placeholder said:

If this were the only fireworks at the display you might have a point. Or don't you believe that more is coming?

C'mon you have to admit this is embarrassing for the dems, all the talk of Trump behind bars is pretty funny isn't it? Me, I fully expected to Trump himself to be found out for tax fraud.

 

Anyone of us who uses the long form because of rentals and business and such have done some fuzzy math on our taxes. And, I'd bet Trump has done some extreme fuzzy math, and the highlight out of this is.......................

The Trump Organization could face a maximum of $1.61 million in fines when sentenced in mid-January.

47 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

Don’t worry, I’m sure his name will start popping up in quite a few subpoenas and indictments soon enough.

But this thread is about this case...not possible future hypotheticals.

3 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

As an obvious supporter of the disgraced 45, you must either admit you are aware of the traitor's sociopathic need to have his fingers intimately in all his workings, or that you just don't understand his treasonous workings. He owned the company, the buck stops there.

Lots of people own companies...are they responsible for every act of each and every one of their employees. Is that the best you got?

7 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Lots of people own companies...are they responsible for every act of each and every one of their employees. Is that the best you got?

That's the entire principal of being the company owner. Otherwise, people would name themselves owners then put their minions out performing all kinds of crimes, then throw their hands up and say, "I was just the owner, I have no responsibility." Weak tea, buddy. Weak tea.

17 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

But this thread is about this case...not possible future hypotheticals.

Feel free to report my post as being off topic….

15 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

But this thread is about this case...not possible future hypotheticals.

Not hypotheticals. This was a test to see if more such cases that are waiting on the sidelines can go forward. And why the hell are you still defending this traitorous criminal? Haven't you received the memo? He's a loser many times over and is going to continue losing.

19 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

C'mon you have to admit this is embarrassing for the dems, all the talk of Trump behind bars is pretty funny isn't it? Me, I fully expected to Trump himself to be found out for tax fraud.

 

Anyone of us who uses the long form because of rentals and business and such have done some fuzzy math on our taxes. And, I'd bet Trump has done some extreme fuzzy math, and the highlight out of this is.......................

The Trump Organization could face a maximum of $1.61 million in fines when sentenced in mid-January.

I don’t recall any Democrats claiming this case against the Trump organization was going to result in Trump behind bars.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Isn't James Clapper's claim to fame "testilying" to Congress when he said the CIA/NSA didn't collect the private personal information of American citizens ???? Not really someone I would quote as an example of personal integrity or trust in government.

 

James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, denied Tuesday that he lied to Congress when he falsely testified during the Obama administration that the government does “not wittingly” collect the telephone records of millions of Americans. 

 

https://apnews.com/article/business-33a88feb083ea35515de3c73e3d854ad

I believe him where, in that article, he says he had misunderstood the question. In any case I would have at least hemmed and hawed, because the CIA and NSA are not allowed to collect the personal phone numbers of US citizens resident in the U.S.

Edited December 7, 20223 yr by Dustdevil

45 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I don’t recall any Democrats claiming this case against the Trump organization was going to result in Trump behind bars.

 

 

Exactly. I'm sure he just blurts out stuff without any research whatsoever. As we know Trump was not on trial here but his company was, we also know from court fillings that Trump personally wrote the cheques and sanctioned the fraud.

 

This does not bode well for all the other cases and probes including tax that he has to face in the future:

 

For Trump, tax fraud case just one of several legal problems

https://apnews.com/article/new-york-manhattan-donald-trump-business-bde570517ca92b9028f487c2c0593e35

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

Exactly. I'm sure he just blurts out stuff without any research whatsoever. As we know Trump was not on trial here but his company was, we also know from court fillings that Trump personally wrote the cheques and sanctioned the fraud.

 

This does not bode well for all the other cases and probes including tax that he has to face in the future:

 

For Trump, tax fraud case just one of several legal problems

https://apnews.com/article/new-york-manhattan-donald-trump-business-bde570517ca92b9028f487c2c0593e35

What he’s actually trying to do is frame this victory for Justice/defeat for Trump’s criminal business empire as some kind of Democrat failure.

 

It is of course nothing of the sort.

1 hour ago, HappyExpat57 said:

That's the entire principal of being the company owner. Otherwise, people would name themselves owners then put their minions out performing all kinds of crimes, then throw their hands up and say, "I was just the owner, I have no responsibility." Weak tea, buddy. Weak tea.

Apparently the government doesn't share your view as they declined to name the owner of the company in question as a defendant in this case.

1 hour ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Not hypotheticals. This was a test to see if more such cases that are waiting on the sidelines can go forward. And why the hell are you still defending this traitorous criminal? Haven't you received the memo? He's a loser many times over and is going to continue losing.

Your statement about future cases is certainly hypothetical. This case was nothing but fulfilling a campaign promise by a New York state Democrat Party political hack. Donald Trump has been a business figure in New York state for decades but this case was only brought after he squashed like a bug the Democrat Party heroine Hillary Clinton. President Trump was not a named defendant in this case and has no culpability for any of the actions of those found liable in it.

I sure am glad that I did not drink the kool aide.  It is pretty amusing watching the cult trying to defend the indefensible,  twisting themselves into knots to try and create space without saying what has been apparent for a very long time.  Trump is an egotistical spoiled little rich boy that is a LOSER.

 

Put down the kool aide and open your eyes and tell everyone with a straight face that you think he is an honest honorable man that has broken no laws and really really cares about the lives of his cult beyond how much $$ he can milk.

3 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Your statement about future cases is certainly hypothetical. This case was nothing but fulfilling a campaign promise by a New York state Democrat Party political hack. Donald Trump has been a business figure in New York state for decades but this case was only brought after he squashed like a bug the Democrat Party heroine Hillary Clinton. President Trump was not a named defendant in this case and has no culpability for any of the actions of those found liable in it.

Even if he signed the checks and explicitly authorized the payments? I'd just say watch this space.

9 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Apparently the government doesn't share your view as they declined to name the owner of the company in question as a defendant in this case.

There are clear good reasons not to.

 

Naming Trump would have given him the opportunity to claim ‘double jeopardy’ in any further criminal trials arising from this case.

 

The jury has found the Trump Business Empire guilty of criminal fraud, prosecutors can now pursue the business’ executives and owners for the part they played in these crimes while the business faces the consequences of the guilty verdict.

4 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Your statement about future cases is certainly hypothetical. This case was nothing but fulfilling a campaign promise by a New York state Democrat Party political hack. Donald Trump has been a business figure in New York state for decades but this case was only brought after he squashed like a bug the Democrat Party heroine Hillary Clinton. President Trump was not a named defendant in this case and has no culpability for any of the actions of those found liable in it.

Nothing to do with Hillary Clinton, put her back in that rent free space you’ve allotted her. 

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

C'mon you have to admit this is embarrassing for the dems, all the talk of Trump behind bars is pretty funny isn't it? Me, I fully expected to Trump himself to be found out for tax fraud.

 

Anyone of us who uses the long form because of rentals and business and such have done some fuzzy math on our taxes. And, I'd bet Trump has done some extreme fuzzy math, and the highlight out of this is.......................

The Trump Organization could face a maximum of $1.61 million in fines when sentenced in mid-January.

Yes. That's why the Trump organization spent all that time and effort on fighting the charges because they didn't want the Dems to be embarrassed by the outcome. As is obvious, the more charges the Trump Organization was  found guilty of, the more embarrassing it would be for the Democrats.  What's worse, the most embarrassing scenario came to pass: the Democrats embarrassed themselves on all 17 charges and even more embarrassingly, the maximum fine was imposed on the Trump Organization. Today is a black and embarrassing day indeed for the Democrats. Trump triumphs once again. MAGA!!!

Edited December 7, 20223 yr by placeholder

35 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Apparently the government doesn't share your view as they declined to name the owner of the company in question as a defendant in this case.

Again, this was a test case. Now the Jan 6 committee is forwarding criminal referrals to the justice department, and more will follow now that it's been demonstrated 45's teflon is breaking down and sh!t is now sticking to his rotting tangerine hide. The chickens are comin' home to roost. You still haven't explained why you continue to defend this loser. You're backing the wrong horse.

31 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Your statement about future cases is certainly hypothetical. This case was nothing but fulfilling a campaign promise by a New York state Democrat Party political hack. Donald Trump has been a business figure in New York state for decades but this case was only brought after he squashed like a bug the Democrat Party heroine Hillary Clinton. President Trump was not a named defendant in this case and has no culpability for any of the actions of those found liable in it.

And that's why Trump decided not to contest the case but plead no contest. Because the founder of Trump University and the man who made charitable donations to himself, had no reason to fear that his reputation would be remain anything but spotless. Oh...wait a minute...

1 hour ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Again, this was a test case. Now the Jan 6 committee is forwarding criminal referrals to the justice department, and more will follow now that it's been demonstrated 45's teflon is breaking down and sh!t is now sticking to his rotting tangerine hide. The chickens are comin' home to roost. You still haven't explained why you continue to defend this loser. You're backing the wrong horse.

Government prosecutors don't have "test cases," they have "cases" they bring if there is evidence, in their eye, of a crime having been committed. It seems to me you can't get to grips with the fact President Trump was not named as a defendant in this case (because there wasn't evidence of his participation in any of the allegedly fraudulent acts of some employees of the Trump Organization). As for the work of the House Comittee, it will all be flushed town the House lavatories the day the GOP takes over the chamber in January.

2 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Government prosecutors don't have "test cases," they have "cases" they bring if there is evidence, in their eye, of a crime having been committed. It seems to me you can't get to grips with the fact President Trump was not named as a defendant in this case (because there wasn't evidence of his participation in any of the allegedly fraudulent acts of some employees of the Trump Organization). As for the work of the House Comittee, it will all be flushed town the House lavatories the day the GOP takes over the chamber in January.

I'm watching Alvin Bragg on CNN right now saying their work isn't finished yet. The House judicial committee has no say in those investigations. Meantime, the House J6 committee has announced that it will be making criminal referrals to the DoJ.

 

The prosecutor in that case explicitly claimed that Trump authorized the fraudulent tax dodging scheme. It would be silly to presume nothing will come of that.

 

The special counsel has also just subpoenaed several state officials asking for their communications with Trump associates around Jan 6.

8 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Government prosecutors don't have "test cases," they have "cases" they bring if there is evidence, in their eye, of a crime having been committed. It seems to me you can't get to grips with the fact President Trump was not named as a defendant in this case (because there wasn't evidence of his participation in any of the allegedly fraudulent acts of some employees of the Trump Organization). As for the work of the House Comittee, it will all be flushed town the House lavatories the day the GOP takes over the chamber in January.

Nobody was named as a defendant, it was a case against the company. However one of those involved Allen Weisselberg, who for decades was one of Donald Trump's most trusted and loyal employees as chief financial officer has already pleaded guilty in a separate case and did a plea deal for testifying in this case so he only gets a 5 month jail term.

3 hours ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Lots of people own companies...are they responsible for every act of each and every one of their employees. Is that the best you got?

Not every employee is the CFO, though.

13 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Government prosecutors don't have "test cases," they have "cases" they bring if there is evidence, in their eye, of a crime having been committed. It seems to me you can't get to grips with the fact President Trump was not named as a defendant in this case (because there wasn't evidence of his participation in any of the allegedly fraudulent acts of some employees of the Trump Organization). As for the work of the House Comittee, it will all be flushed town the House lavatories the day the GOP takes over the chamber in January.

Well, not what gets published in the Congressional Record. Which could possibly include Trump's tax returns.

27 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Government prosecutors don't have "test cases," they have "cases" they bring if there is evidence, in their eye, of a crime having been committed. It seems to me you can't get to grips with the fact President Trump was not named as a defendant in this case (because there wasn't evidence of his participation in any of the allegedly fraudulent acts of some employees of the Trump Organization). As for the work of the House Comittee, it will all be flushed town the House lavatories the day the GOP takes over the chamber in January.

I'm done. I forgot what it was like trying to get through the fog of denial 45 supporters wrap themselves up in. You haven't nor will you ever explain why you carry water for the disgraced tangerine traffic cone of treason. Go ahead, have whatever last word you want, no more time wasted here.