128d
@AverageJoe1
Right, here we go again, Trump is above the law, no matter he screwed banks and his lawyers, his architects, he still owes them millions from YEARS ago, and you without even looking at the evidence conclude he was over fined, a DOJ witch hunt, and you figure it was all at the urging of Biden.
You need to wake up and smell the covfefe.
128d
@averagejoe1 saidWell, then, I'm sure the Trump bought and paid for Supreme Court would have no problem setting aside another amendment for Trump and Trump alone.
Here it is, with comments. Sonhouse is preparing a quasi-petition on another thread as to whether this applies to Trump, or why it would not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
@sonhouse saidAnd YOU, turkey, need to stick to issues.
@AverageJoe1
Right, here we go again, Trump is above the law, no matter he screwed banks and his lawyers, his architects, he still owes them millions from YEARS ago, and you without even looking at the evidence conclude he was over fined, a DOJ witch hunt, and you figure it was all at the urging of Biden.
You need to wake up and smell the covfefe.
And, BTW, no one was hurt in the NYC $450B judgement case. Bankers were witnesses to attest to same.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 143713
128d
@averagejoe1 saiddemocrats are some dirty lowlife b astards
Here it is, with comments. Sonhouse is preparing a quasi-petition on another thread as to whether this applies to Trump, or why it would not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
“The Supreme Court has held that the Excessive Fines Clause prohibits fines that are "so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law".
@mott-the-hoople saidNot excessive. Suitable for the crime. Yes, I said crime.
democrats are some dirty lowlife b astards
“The Supreme Court has held that the Excessive Fines Clause prohibits fines that are "so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law".
Chickens coming home to roost.
@averagejoe1 saidA little louder, please?
And, BTW, no one was hurt in the NYC $450B judgement case. Bankers were witnesses to attest to same.
You ARE talking about the verdict, yeah?
128d
@suzianne saidTrump cultists ain't good at maths.
Not excessive. Suitable for the crime. Yes, I said crime.
Chickens coming home to roost.
Its just the ill-gotten portion of his gains that he has to give back. He made $350 million more than he would have if he had submitted honest books, and that with interest is $454 million. Not even a fine at all.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 143713
128d
@wildgrass saidI guess you missed where the bankers testified this is normal business procedure, the way everyone does it. Would gladly do business with Trump again.
Trump cultists ain't good at maths.
Its just the ill-gotten portion of his gains that he has to give back. He made $350 million more than he would have if he had submitted honest books, and that with interest is $454 million. Not even a fine at all.
But you cant admit that, it would destroy your whole stupid argument 😂
@averagejoe1 saidThe banks were denied the interest payments he would have had to pay if he had not lied his face off about value of his assets
And YOU, turkey, need to stick to issues.
And, BTW, no one was hurt in the NYC $450B judgement case. Bankers were witnesses to attest to same.
The city taxpayers were denied the tax dollars he would have had to pay if he hadn’t lied his face off about the value of his assets
Jesus below average Joe could you be anymore economically illiterate. You are living proof of the level of stupid required to be a Trump supporter
127d
@suzianne saidNo, I am talking about the unreasonable amount levied on Trump. You miss issues like SHouse does. His is the first response above, and he rages about Trump......but does not mention the issue......Is the 8th amendment violated. You miss it, too. So here we go, and I haven't even had my coffee yet.
A little louder, please?
You ARE talking about the verdict, yeah?
127d
@wildgrass saidI have never seen this information. Could you link it? Why, you could prove me wrong for a change!!! That, that this is a fair finding after all.
Trump cultists ain't good at maths.
Its just the ill-gotten portion of his gains that he has to give back. He made $350 million more than he would have if he had submitted honest books, and that with interest is $454 million. Not even a fine at all.
127d
@kevcvs57 saidI don't follow the intricate doings of Trump's life like you and Sonhouse do. I am BUSY! There are deals to be made, wrapping one up tomorrow which will cover a lot more than a college tuition. Worky worky. Shav would hate it, no time to throw darts.
The banks were denied the interest payments he would have had to pay if he had not lied his face off about value of his assets
The city taxpayers were denied the tax dollars he would have had to pay if he hadn’t lied his face off about the value of his assets
Jesus below average Joe could you be anymore economically illiterate. You are living proof of the level of stupid required to be a Trump supporter
But query this. Just because this cab driver who did not listen to anything in court (his judgement was pre-determined) found Trump guilty of something, does not make it so. There are vacant lots (Maralago is 20 acres oceanfront) for sale on the intracostal for $150M. Mara-lago could be worth $900M.
The judge just did not seem to factor that in. So, Trump could be innocent, little feller, and an appeals court may just determine that.