The reaction to this bogus decision against Trump is just overwhelming. I cannot even tell you how many emails have come in, all getting the point and confirming it is time to get the hell out of New York. They have shown the entire world that no rule of law is left standing.
As an international hedge fund manager, the #1 assessment you need to make is COUNTRY RISK. Is it safe to invest there, and is there a robust rule of law that you can count on to secure your investment? That is why you do not invest in countries like Iran, for they had their revolution and nationalized all private assets. Russia did the same during the Communist Revolution of 1917.
Even during the American Revolution, they confiscated the assets of anyone who supported the king. Those confiscated assets became the backing for currency.
Now we have City & State Risk. There is already a mass migration underway from Blue States to Red States. This will only accelerate this advance. I am warning clients that the longer they wait to have property to sell in NYC, the greater the loss they will face. Sell now before there is no bid.
The Rule of Law has completely collapsed in New York City. It is no longer investment grade for there is no possible way to secure your property. One lawyer who wrote in, and here are his comments, which need to be reviewed carefully:
Hi Martin.
I have three things to pass on to you:
First, you are absolutely correct. Does the majority of the New York business community really know what Judge Engoron did? … Engoron and Hochul confirmed that New York is a “connection-based society” not a “contract-based society,” or, as you say “corrupt to its core.” All the assurances by the Governor Hochul that businesses should not fear the civil action the state filed against Trump and the money judgment Engoron rendered, and that there’s nothing to worry about, is just another confirmation that New York is now completely a “connection-based society.” The governor even confirmed that she could, but won’t, overrule Engoron proving that in New York the branches of government are intermixed. … Hochul does not realize that her comments were damaging not reassuring. What fool will trust her and New York now. My solution: Sell all equities of companies that have their headquarters or domicile where they could be subject to the jurisdiction of New York and can be sued under the same laws Trump was.
Second, it is a correct move to challenge the definition of “fraud.” In the mid-1980s I was lead plaintiff’s counsel in the first civil RICO suit filed against a financial institution in … . The case was allotted to a judge like Engoron. That judge ran me through the ringer, but I kept the case alive. At one point the court was toying with the question “What is fraud?” The court was trying to find yet another way to dismiss the case and require me to re-plead it. I did a massive study of fraud. I even read John T Nonan’s book entitled Bribes. The definitions of fraud in our state and federal courts are too many to count, but I finally boiled it down to the essential elements, i.e., all those that absolutely MUST be present or there is no fraud.
This is the definition I found that applies to ALL cases no matter how the elements are worded is this: FRAUD IS THE VOLUNTARY TRANSFER OF SOMETHING OF VALUE BY DECEIT. The occurrence sued on and alleged to be fraud MUST be (1) VOLUNTARY, (2) A TRANSFER, (3) OF SOMETHING OF VALUE, (4) BY DECEIT. If any of these four elements are missing, it’s not fraud. Obviously, New York is missing the transfer element which, I think, makes each of the other elements a non sequitur and meaningless.
Third, cities and states have found new ways to increase revenue by twisting laws and our basic societal framework of separate branches of government. As you have long maintained, they are on a hunt for taxes. From 2000 to 2005 I was a Deputy City Attorney for the City …. We handled the civil legal affairs of the city, not the criminal cases. After I left, … , a lawyer contacted me and asked me to analyze the facts of a case he thought he had. I found that … had changed its procedures regarding blighted property to avoid the courts of the judicial branch. The city established a list of huge fines for properties that were cited with code violations. The fines accrued interest after a certain time period passed, and the property owner did not correct the violations.
The procedure was unconstitutional because no judge EVER reviewed or had ANY role in the proceedings to collect the fines and interest. A hearing officer (executive branch) would assess a fine and give the property owner a specific amount of time to correct the violations. He would prepare and sign an “administrative” judgment setting forth his findings, rulings and assessing the fine plus interest. If the time elapsed and the violations were not remedied by the property owner, the Clerk of Court (executive branch, ministerial powers only, no judicial powers) of the state court in … would issue a request for seizure and sale to the … Civil Sheriff (executive branch, ministerial powers only, no judicial powers).
The Civil Sheriff would issue an order of seizure and sale and the property would be auctioned off to the highest bidder. The fines plus interest were always high enough that the property owner could not pay same, but low enough that someone with capital could pick up the properties at a very, very cheap price. The “laws” that established this procedure were mostly ordinances passed by the … City Council, which was the wrong authority to approve a seizure and sale that was not reviewed and signed by a duly elected or appointed state court judge. Cities are not separate sovereigns with the right to enact general laws, like causes of action and shifting judicial powers to authorities that have only ministerial executive duties.
So, intermixing branches of government and shifting and assuming powers that states and cities cannot exercise are not the only scams being used to collect money. States and cities are doing end runs around Constitutional principles. New York did it by giving the court the power to calculate general damages rather than enacting legislation reciting a list of fines that the state may impose for business improprieties. The state courts would then just include the fine that applies under the circumstances that was set by the state legislature. That would be Constitutional, but having the freedom to assess unspecified damages that the state does not suffer is absurd.
To summarize, no transfer = no fraud, and no fines set by the legislature to assess replaced by the power to impose general damages = a sham system that is a blurred mixture of the executive branch and the judicial branch.
Hope all is well.
Regards,
EGM
