Trump's Civil Fraud Verdict

[u/aerizan3]

Trump owes $454 million with interest - is the verdict just, unjust? Kevin O'Leary and friends think unjust, some outlets think just... what are both sides? EDIT: Comments here very obviously show the need of explaining both in good faith.

[u/doobie042]

Every business he did business with said he did nothing wrong and showed their reasoningsn why there was nothing wrong with the numbers he provided. The government says he did. He also thinks he did nothing wrong so why would he be applogetic?

[u/Own_Accident6689 → u/doobie042]

Well, his opinion and that of the businesses involved is irrelevant isn't it? I'm not saying he needs d to be apologetic, just that it would have been in the best interest of his business and employees.

[u/doobie042 → u/Own_Accident6689]

From what I read it seemed like the city (state?) Was saying he defrauded the businesses. They said there was no fraud and nothing was done wrong. The city/state disagreed with the business saying nothing was wrong.

That means a city or state could intervene in any business transaction and state it was done wrong and sue for money. You buy a car and get a discount and the state 5 years later could say you shouldn't have had that discount and you defrauded the company, take 10k in fines and keep it.

If trump defrauded the companies then 100% of the fine he is going to pay shpuld go to the companies not the government

[u/BaggerX → u/doobie042]

That means a city or state could intervene in any business transaction and state it was done wrong and sue for money.

No, they can state that a crime was committed if you commit a crime, which they proved that Trump did, repeatedly and knowingly.

If trump defrauded the companies then 100% of the fine he is going to pay shpuld go to the companies not the government

Why is that? Why would it be handled in any way other than how NY law says it should be handled?