Without loss, how can there be ‘fraud’?

 Guilty until proven innocent?  No banks or financial institutions were defrauded in any way.  They created a "crime" without victims

Maybe Letitia James should sue people for fraud who actually caused losses by fraud, instead of targeting politicians she doesn’t like; after all, that seems to be the legal definition of the crime. From the Code of Federal Regulations government website:

As usually applied under State laws, the term ‘fraud or dishonesty’ encompasses such matters as larceny, theft, embezzlement, forgery, misappropriation, wrongful abstraction, wrongful conversion, willful misapplication or any other fraudulent or dishonest acts resulting in financial loss [emphasis added].

Without loss, how can there be fraud? Reported by The Hill, just hours ago:

The New York attorney general’s office hired an expert witness, who testified that the Trump Organization’s skewed financial statements may have cost banks more than $168 million in interest.

But when Deutsche Bank executives took to the stand, they testified that the bank wanted to work with the Trump Organization, did its due diligence and found no fraud — arguments Trump’s counsel has made from the start.

A big target for Ms. James would be all the investment bankers, venture capital companies, and owners of electric vehicle companies who raised hundreds of billions of dollars in the equity markets.

They put out pie in the sky numbers, completely concocted made-up future sales numbers, and claimed they would have a huge cash flow in the future to justify the initial stock prices; fast forward, and there were no profits or sales in most of these companies when they went public. Individuals, mutual funds, pension funds, and others lost hundreds of billions because the numbers were pulled out of thin air. From a recent report at The Wall Street Journal:

Electric-vehicle startups were flying high just a few years ago. Now many are focused on survival.

At least 18 EV and battery startups that went public in recent years were at risk of running out of cash by the end of 2024 as of their most recent filings, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis. They include companies such as Nikola and Fisker, which attracted investors with bold promises to transform the industry and fight climate change with their electric trucks and SUVs.

That was before they stumbled amid rising costs and manufacturing problems.

So why isn’t “Peekaboo” James taking these companies to court for exaggerating their value? The answer is that she doesn’t actually care about losses—she simply wants to “get Trump.”

Maybe she could take the Biden administration to court for hyping electric cars. It is like the pump-and-dump stock-selling in the “Wolf of Wall Street” movie.

Or she could take the United Nations to court for all the made-up dire predictions that humanity only has a few years left to save the planet, which certainly played a part in the E.V. loss scam—its bureaucrats pretended that electric cars are the way to control temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity. The predictions are made up and the solution is made up. That looks like pure fraud, especially when the American taxpayer has taken a massive loss over the agenda.

Or she could take the companies that sell worthless pieces of paper called carbon credits to court. They do not reduce the carbon of private jets, mansions, yachts, or gas guzzling trucks. They are just pieces of paper that allow people and companies to claim they care and to act like they are complying with radical regulations of the government, and who picks up the loss? The taxpayer.

Instead of taking people and businesses to court that have hyped investments, had no cash flow, and caused a huge number of investors and innocent bystanders (taxpayers) to lose massive amounts of money, she decided to abuse the judicial system to target Trump.

Trump did not cause people or banks to lose money, and had a history of cash flow that justified the loans, but Letitia James found some people that were willing to go on the stand and claim he exaggerated the value of his properties, so she put the plan into motion and set out to destroy him and his businesses.

And most of the media cheers about this pure abuse of our legal system to destroy someone they all hate. I wonder why people think the judicial system is biased and don’t trust the media?

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/01/without_loss_how_can_there_be_fraud.html

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/01/sure_hell_debate_joe_biden_tells_us_his_accomplishments.html

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/01/our_national_problem_is_economic_illiteracy.html