Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    40414
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Back to the Trump civil fraud appeal. The opinion(s) are a divided mess. Being a civil case, AG James is free to appeal it to the ultimate NY court of appeals, which she has vowed to do. Looking at it further, I don't think the NY court of appeals analysis will hold up on further appeal. It doesn't make any sense. On one hand, it says it's an unconstitutional fine or penalty in violation of the 8th Amendment. That's something you find when an award is properly calculated, but the statutory scheme that allows it is over-generous or over-punitive, or as applied to the particular facts and damage award, it's just excessive. It's not something you hold when there are simple errors in the damage calculation. On the other hand, the ruling says the disgorgement penalty was miscalculated, or relied on two things, the Old Post Office lease and the Ferry Point golf course operating agreement, where fraud wasn't proven or proven adequately. That would have knocked the award down by $195M by the court of appeals' own calculation. When damages are miscalculated, or reliant on some element that isn't proper or proven, you remand to the trial court for a recalculation or retrial on those issues. But that's obviously not what they did here. They should have either remitted the disgorgement by the $195M or sent it back to Engoron to do so. I don't think that's going to survive further appeal. Notably, the court of appeals did affirm all other aspects of the judgment, including the injunctive portions where Trump can't own a business chartered in NY. It's possible that the further appeal undoes that, too, but it seems rather unlikely.
  2. Is it really a rebranding if you don't change the word mark?
  3. And knock the fuck out of some Trumpkins on the way to the polls.
  4. I might argue that Cracker Barrel is a strong enough brand that everyone knows what it is. So there's no need for Cletus and the barrel o darkies. It's not like they're starting from scratch and need to inform people what they are.
  5. Well, then, how do the clerks and young attorneys become seasoned attorneys? It's incumbent on us to know our arguments and the counter-arguments. And that's a skill that's honed by doing. If the young and inexperienced aren't doing, I don't know how they'll ever become experienced. I've never been surprised by opposing counsel's argument, sometimes their factual assertions, but rarely or never the argument itself. Maybe it's because I've spent most of my life in federal courts, where the written argument is 90% of it. I can see a lot more surprise in Texas state court, where briefing gets ignored in favor of oral argument.
  6. What an immense turd that guy is.
  7. Some background. Cracker Barrel is changing its logo from this: To this: And MAGA is absolutely losing its shit, calling the above woke. I always thought the barrel was full of crackers, but I guess it must have been full of darkies. Or maybe it's the fact that Cracker Barrel actually treats its LGBTQ employees like human beings, which, of course, has nothing to do with the logo.
  8. Well, I consider having a law that is alternately enforced or not enforced, according to whim of administration to be fucked up and symbolic of a legal scheme that is in bad need of reform. But it's not the biggest fucked up thing, no, you're right there. It appears that a lot of the world is pretty similar to the US, though, misdemeanor first offense, often not enforced, and harsher penalties for repeat offenders. https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=829757
  9. NPR is pRoPAganDa!!11!!111!
  10. Affirmed in all other respects, though. Told y'all that monetary part was likely excessive. On appeal, it seems that the monetary award is characterized as "disgorgement," which means coughing up all ill-gotten gains, that is, all of the loan proceeds that were tainted by fraud. I didn't catch that that was the nature of the remedy at the trial level. It is unclear to me whether the disgorgement can be recalculated on retrial or not. Its nature is usually "equitable," meaning entirely in the judge's discretion and not subject to a burden of proof, so that would seem to tend to mean that the judge is free to halve it or quarter it or otherwise reduce it.
  11. Forgot about that cooze. She's not very articulate. He really did bring along every sycophant and suck up.
  12. In yet another facet of our fucked-up immigration policy, first time unlawful or improper entry into the United States is indeed a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325 Second and subsequent unlawful entries are a minor felony. You are correct that the process of removing or deporting unlawful entrants is a civil matter, but it can also result in criminal charges. Historically, though, we have not criminally charged first-time or even second-time unlawful entrants. Only chronic re-enterers get charged criminally. No, a financial consultant that does a lot of expert witness work.
  13. Christians, about 100%. "Christians," about 0%.
  14. That appears to be a quilt on the way depicting child coal miners on the way to or from the mine? Dafuq?
  15. If you're not going to hyphenate passive-aggressive, it has to be "passively aggressively," and I'm not sure the hyphen saves you in any event.
  16. A forward-facing garage at the back of the lot is ideal. At the front of the house, not so much.
  17. I'm not lifey-sciency enough to evaluate hardly anything the FDA does from the science standpoint. I do sabe some of the exclusivity provisions and how it interfaces with the USPTO, but that's about it, other than some general knowledge of bureaucracy in technical areas.
  18. No, I don't think so. CHIPs was a bipartisan effort, yes. But it did not involve taking an equity stake in any company in return for grants. Trump and Lutnick are doing this unilaterally, without Congressional or Democrat consent.
  19. Yeah, one way or another, these plaintiffs/complainants have all been "taken off the board."
  20. I think the standard for sustaining a prosecution in the face of such a motion is low, but you never know. I had a feeling this was all based on informant testimony and the testimony would lack credibility.
  21. The whole Dem trans thing boils down to several things, none of which constitute attention whoring by LGBTQ, IMHO. bathroom bills sports legislation/Title XI issues regarding LGBTQ anti-trans medical legislation All three are almost 100% performative by the GOP. I say almost 100% because there is very slight room for disagreement on the sports and medical thing, but it's mostly "icky queers."
  22. Also, wtf is the point? Making returns for the US? They claim they're not going to exercise voting rights. But that's enough stock to move the market on sale/"purchase." I suspect that it's just performative in that Trump sincerely wishes he'd done the CHIPS Act and that his trade/manufacturing policy was that coherent. The only thing that can be criticized is that it's a "government giveaway," and this mitigates that to some extent.
  23. I didn't assume either way. I said "likely as not." As we know or should know, when a complaining witness refuses to testify to the grand jury or at trial, because they lied initially or some other reason (bought off), prosecutors have to no-bill. Beard out front should have told ya.
  24. That hasn't really been established. Likely as not, she was bought off. On the other hand, it appears to be a case of "wrong hole." Consent is consent and is mandatory, but this is about as close a case as you can get.
×
×
  • Create New...