• NeuromancerOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    Irrelevant. Fraud requires a victim. Who was the victim?

    • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      So for those of you reading along at home, wintermule doesn’t dispute that there were false business records and false financial statements issued, nor dispute that there was intent to do so, nor dispute that there was conspiracy to do so.

      People are like " Meh, sure we know he’s a liar and a crook, but whaddya gonna do? He’s our leader! You can’t punish him for breaking the law when nobody got hurt!"

      Shameless.

      • NeuromancerOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        No not false. Unaudited and the bank was aware and made adjustments. You really didn’t listen to anything in the case did you ?

        This is how all commercial loans are done.

        • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Oh I see. Not false, unaudited.

          It’s like Not torture, Strong interrogation!

          Or perhaps, Not teaching kids to pass standardized tests at the expense of creativity and critical thinking, The No Child Left Behind Act!

          Not child abuse, after-school time with Miss Nancy!

          Ok last one: Not pointlessly wreck a shit-ton of expensive equipment and kill a bunch of civilians, Operation Desert Storm!

          Well anyway I did read the judgement. It seems to address your objections.

    • NewPerspective@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Apparently you the way you cry to everybody about it.

      “Trump lied and got more money? But who’s money? That’s right, nobody!”

      • NeuromancerOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        I get you don’t mind fascism but normal people do. Weaponizing the courts isn’t acceptable. No victim. No lost money. Everyone made money. The banks ever testified they’d do the deals again and hope to work with him in the future.

        Sounds like you feel like you are th victim.

        • NewPerspective@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          Defending dishonesty and wanting them to be president sure sounds like fascism to me. But go ahead and keep believing that Trump is an innocent man.

          • NeuromancerOPM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            9 months ago

            Obviously you’ve never paid attention to my views of Trump. He’s not my pick. That said I don’t like corruption and the courts are acting corrupt. That is why the governor made a statement since so many companies have said they can’t risk doing business in NY

        • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Weaponizing the courts isn’t acceptable.

          “Lock her up! Lock her up!”

          A presidential candidate calling for that exact thing is acceptable though. Got it.

            • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Ah, yes.

              I love when you ignore the point to focus on something else because you know I’m right.

              Predictable as clockwork.

              Now you’ll declare victory and run away.

              • NeuromancerOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                9 months ago

                You’re not right. Nobody was prosecuted. The courts were not used. It’s apples and oranges.

                • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  Maybe read what I actually said.

                  It sounds like you’re fine with presidential candidates threatening to weaponize the courts so long as they’re lying and/or incompetent?

                  You’d protest if Clinton actually got prosecuted then?

                  • NeuromancerOPM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I would. The legal system should not be a weapon for political opponents. While Hillary committed a crime and should be prosecuted; it shouldn’t be done by the opposition. It comes off as banana republic style.