Appeals court judges shine light on Tish James' monstrously...

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

62% : Moreover, even if we stipulate that Trump overvalued some of his assets (tripling the size of his luxury Manhattan apartment, for example), Trump's statements of financial condition admonished counterparties to perform their own due diligence regarding any loans or contracts.
60% : Trump is a longtime international real-estate and business magnate, who has decades-long relationships with banks and insurers.
58% : With Trump, to the contrary, they kept doing business.
45% : Remember, if a malevolent partisan prosecutor can do this to Trump, she can do it to any person, business, or cause that offends progressive Democrats.
42% : Indulged at every turn by Judge Engoron -- who dutifully found Trump liable on the persistent fraud allegation before the trial even started -- James introduced testimony from a cooperative banking expert who dreamed up a formula for what higher rates counterparties would have charged Trump had he accurately stated his asset values -- despite the absence of evidence that any of these financial professionals had actually relied on Trump's asset values.
41% : "Having campaigned for office promising that, if elected, she would find a way to wield her powers against the Democrats' archnemesis, James did the unprecedented: She invoked against Trump a consumer protection statute -- Executive Law §63(12) -- enacted to protect the public from "persistent fraud" practices.
26% : Trump has appealed and at last week's oral argument, a five-judge panel of the appellate division was demonstrably troubled by James's case.Mostly, the judges worried aloud that the AG had overstepped her jurisdiction and had no business refereeing private transactions between sophisticated financial actors.
21% : Most judges seemed unmoved by the state's tenuous claim that Trump's lenders must have dealt more unfavorably with the public due to the risks attendant to dealing with Trump.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.