Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York judge has scheduled an October 2023 trial for former U.S. President Donald Trump, three of his adult children and the Trump Organization in a lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James accusing them of fraudulently overvaluing the real estate company's assets and Trump's net worth.
Justice Arthur Engoron of the state Supreme Court in Manhattan set the trial date during a contentious hearing on Tuesday following motions by the Trumps the night before to have the civil lawsuit dismissed.
So many Trump threads... So many walls closing in... So much TDS... It must be that time again... Mean Tweets are back Too bad we have to wait 2 more painful years before that $1.79 gas is back...
Does it really matter if Trump inflated the value of his properties? Doesn't that mean he pays more in taxes? and why would Trump have anything to do with that. If any of us needed a loan against our house, a reverse mortgage etc, the bank would send out an appraiser. What bank would take someones word for the value?
This is just another bogus lawsuit they are throwing at the guy hoping that something will stick. Does it really matter? Trump has already been tried in the court of public opinion and more and more people do not want him to run again. It is not that they didn't like his Pro American Policies but it has more to do with the absolute dumping the Dems dropped on this country 24/7 as they threw what is now a 6 year tantrum.
trial: no indictment
trial 2: no indictment
trial 3: no indictment
trial 4: no indictment
trial 5: no indictment
trial 6: no indictment
trial 7: no indictment
trial 8: no indictment
trial 9: no indictment
trial 10: no indictment
trial 11: no indictment
trial 12: no indictment
trial 13: no indictment
trial 14: no indictment
trial 15: no indictment
trial 16: no indictment
trial 17: no indictment
trial 18: no indictment
trial 19: no indictment
trial 20: no indictment
Can you, OP follow it (follow the bouncing ball)?
Now, I don't know how many trials there are, but hopefully the OP can start understanding.
Unless the OP can give us an explanation of why so many trials but no indictments?
trial: no indictment
trial 2: no indictment
trial 3: no indictment
trial 4: no indictment
trial 5: no indictment
trial 6: no indictment
trial 7: no indictment
trial 8: no indictment
trial 9: no indictment
trial 10: no indictment
trial 11: no indictment
trial 12: no indictment
trial 13: no indictment
trial 14: no indictment
trial 15: no indictment
trial 16: no indictment
trial 17: no indictment
trial 18: no indictment
trial 19: no indictment
trial 20: no indictment
Can you, OP follow it (follow the bouncing ball)?
Now, I don't know how many trials there are, but hopefully the OP can start understanding.
Unless the OP can give us an explanation of why so many trials but no indictments?
Well, the first problem I see is that the indictments come first, and then the trials to determine whether or not the defendant is guilty. Trials may uncover evidence that leads to further indictments, but that is not common.
To have the trial to determine guilt or innocence and then issue an indictment would surely improve the conviction rates of prosecutors, but it would be highly irregular at best.
ThT’s not how it works. That’s not how anything works.
In this particular case, there is no indictment yet, though as previously stated, discovery in the trial may spawn indictments. This trial is to decide a lawsuit brought by Tish James against Trump, his children, and Trump Org for fraud.
Well, the first problem I see is that the indictments come first, and then the trials to determine whether or not the defendant is guilty. Trials may uncover evidence that leads to further indictments, but that is not common.
To have the trial to determine guilt or innocence and then issue an indictment would surely improve the conviction rates of prosecutors, but it would be highly irregular at best.
ThT’s not how it works. That’s not how anything works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tillman7
Some many trials, but no indictment.
Hey cuebald, did you even read the OPs post? It's clear you did not, because the OP is clearly saying "so many trial, but no indictments."
So, cuebald, are you going to call out the OP? We shall see, doubtful, but lets see.
Missed the 2 biggest frauds. Trump Foundation closed and Trump paid a huge fine. Never able to open another.
Then the favorite one. Trump U. closed down with Trump needing to pay out 35 million in fines.
Found guilty in those 2.
Fraud should be DJT's middle name.
Perhaps but still better then "pedo" Joe.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Too bad we have to wait 2 more painful years before that $1.79 gas is back...