Trump ordered to pay over $350M for business fraud

Post the New York state statute that explains the difference.

 

You didn’t link to the full comments. Comedians make a living taking comments out of context.

 

If you're right, the Lequita James is either corrupt as hell, or stupid as hell...lol. Maybe both.

You're saying that Lequita James ignored the statutory definition of fraud and made up her own definition...lol

 

N

Not relevant under NY code 63(12).

 

See Post #840

 

No. She relied on the statutory definition that exists in 63(12).

 

Adding the adjective"persistent " to the noun "fraud" doesn't change the state's definition of "fraud"...lol

 

There is no statutory definition of "fraud" in 63(12).

 

Where does 63(12) suspend the state's statutory definition of fraud?

 

There literally is. I already quoted it for you once. Here it is again.

“The word
“fraud” or “fraudulent” as used herein shall include any device,
scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation,
concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or
unconscionable contractual provisions.”

 

Did you skip over the definition of "fraud" and "fraudulent" in that cite deliberately ? Or because it shows how wrong you were in quoting the definition of "common law fraud" ? Naaaah, it's only a few lines back. You just don't want to admit how wrong you are !

 

Certainly things change, in fact, a saying I like goes "the only constant in life is change"
That being said, there is much that does not seem to change, because not everything changes all at once. (thankfully!)
I observe that the definitions don't change as much as people twist them to fit a particular narrative, or at least try to.
It's all subjective anyway when it comes to speculation. Always has, always will be, sort of by definition.
The thing to remember is that speculation is not truth, and therefore should be cautiously used to form opinions.

 

You asked for the quote. I provided it. Good day.

 

C'mon, Bill.

 

Now that the Orange Stain defenders have lost on the "fraud" and "fraudulent" front, will they then start to argue the SFC's were not fraudulent ?

Stay tuned !

 

It's actually easy if you don't speculate.

 

Bill, really...take this to heart.

 

You provided a monologue from a comedian.

 

Highlighted in red: Then please enlighten me as to how taxes work. lol

The rest: A licensed dealer might do that, but you seem to be better informed, so tell me why they would not.

 

There is no legal statutory definition of fraud in 63(12).

 

Know when you are beat, dude.

Whenever any person shall engage in repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or otherwise demonstrate persistent fraud or illegality in the carrying on, conducting or transaction of business, the attorney general may apply, in the name of the people of the state of New York, to the supreme court of the state of New York, on notice of five days, for an order enjoining the continuance of such business activity or of any fraudulent or illegal acts, directing restitution and damages and, in an appropriate case, cancelling any certificate filed under and by virtue of the provisions of section four hundred forty of the former penal law   3 or section one hundred thirty of the general business law, and the court may award the relief applied for or so much thereof as it may deem proper.  The word “fraud” or “fraudulent” as used herein shall include any device, scheme or artifice to defraud and any deception, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or unconscionable contractual provisions.  The term “persistent fraud” or “illegality” as used herein shall include continuance or carrying on of any fraudulent or illegal act or conduct.  The term “repeated” as used herein shall include repetition of any separate and distinct fraudulent or illegal act, or conduct which affects more than one person.  Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all monies recovered or obtained under this subdivision by a state agency or state official or employee acting in their official capacity shall be subject to subdivision eleven of section four of the state finance law.

As others have pointed out to you, the definition is right there in 63(12)

 

Taxes aren't based on how much profit a company might have made . They're based on what a company did make .

A dealer (with a brain) won't do that because if he ever gets audited, the audit will show the discrepancy between the money he made selling cars and the sales taxes paid by his customers. But that particular example is actual tax evasion and doesn't compare to this case.

 

And here's the New York definition of fraud...

Under New York law, the five elements of a fraud claim must be shown by clear and convincing evidence: (1) a material misrepresentation or omission of fact (2) made by defendant with knowledge of its falsity (3) and intent to defraud; (4) reasonable reliance on the part of the plaintiff; and (5) resulting damage to the plaintiff

The part you posted in bold has to meet those 5 elements.

 

You know, I will never understand how Trumpers can stare right at the truth and never see it. I will admit it must make it easy to repeat things like the Big Lie with conviction !

The word “fraud” or “fraudulent” as used herein shall include any device,
scheme or artifice to defraud AND any deception, misrepresentation,
concealment, suppression, false pretense, false promise or
unconscionable contractual provisions.

 

It’s been stated here in this thread multiple times. You keep embarrasing yourself.