585
Letitia James live tweets daily interest charges on Trump’s $464m fraud ruling
(www.independent.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
585 points (98.2% liked)
News
36344 readers
718 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The funny part is how so far Trump hasn't posted a bond for the appeal. Trump doesn't *have * to do it but the consequences of not doing so are basically calamitous - if he doesn't post bond then the state can seize and sell off his property to the amount he owes. Then both sides fight about it for a year or whatever while the money sits in the court's account and he is deprived of revenue from the properties sold. Oh and the interest keeps accruing. And the lawyer bill will be in the tens of millions.
I'm sure the state won't be sensitive to his reputation when deciding what to seize to cover the debts. Can you imagine the hilarity that would ensue if they sold off Trump Tower or one of his other flagship properties?
So Trump is screwed. If he does somehow post bond there will be a lot of people asking how he managed it since he surely doesn't have the cash. In that case expect firesales of his other properties and loans from super shady foreign businessmen.
I can imagine there are more than a few foreign (and domestic) billionaires salivating at the idea of buying a GOP presidential frontrunner while simultaneously securing fire-sale level security positions on his properties.
That the fun thing about what SCOTUS decided. Now that money is speech, foreign powers can set up PACs which claim to be helping a candidate get elected but are actually able to pay that candidate's legal fees for something totally unrelated and it's all totally legal!
God bless America, am I right?
Incidentally, on the day of the judgement, Elon's jet was in the vicinity of Mar-a-Lago.
https://mastodon.social/@elonjet/111943376124018599
His plan is to become president and make those things go away. Seriously. How they go away isn't important to him, so the calamitous side effects it would cause would be of none of his concern.
Of course it doesn't work that way in a democracy. So they're doing away with that too. If you're an autocrat, suddenly state attorneys general don't really have any power over you.
You say it doesn't work that way yet this person's entire career is one that proves that these systems don't work.
He has largely been immune from consequence and until this actually starts to show teeth then it's just more of the same.
They need to sell Trump Tower to someone that promises to show the exact same respect that Trump showed to the historic landmark that had multiple pieces of art promised to The Met, when he bought the property. Then, shove as much of his gaudy shit in there and demo the whole lot.
I'm hoping for they seize something big and humiliating to his reputation. Wouldn't be surprised if we learn though that Trump Tower or whatever is mortgaged up the ass so the value in seizing it is far less than it's the building's valuation as a total. So that'll be fun since they might have to seize multiple properties. Doesn't have to be confined to NY either, they can enforce seizures on his golf courses, Mar a Lago etc.
So the same it's been for 35 years.
Is it established that he's the actual owner of those properties? Or are they empty shells?
I'm sure it's super complicated what he owns, what his entities own, and what they owe the banks and other investors.
In practice it doesn't matter. If he makes a shell company, the state can seize/lien his ownership thereof and then force a sale of the property anyway.
I don't think that's quite how it works, but I'm not sure.
If he wants to appeal then he has to post cash or surety within 30 days. If he does not, then he can not appeal.
However, I assume that if he does not, the court will still have some song and dance to do before seizing assets.
I suspect Trump will not post bond and appeal, but rather try to delay payment as long as possible, hoping to become POTUS and just authoritarian his way out of it.
He doesn't have to post an appeal bond (otherwise known as a supersedeas bond) to appeal but not doing so means the plaintiff can seize the money pending the outcome of the appeal and can do so how they see fit after 30 days of the judgement.
So on the one hand he could put up various properties as sureties to a bond company and post bond and at least retain control & income from those properties pending appeal. Or he can fail to post bond let the plaintiffs seize what they like regardless of the harm it causes his reputation and business. I'm pretty sure E Jean Carroll and New York would be quite happy to force him to sell off Trump Tower or whatever else to meet his obligations.
But regarding surety & bond, I wonder what bond company would trust Trump's valuations of his own properties. They'll probably demand he put so much up in surety that he'd balk at it. Hence why shady foreign business men might enter the picture.