179
He can’t appeal until he deposits the $83,300,000 to an escrow account.
**
I didn't know this, so you're not allowed to even start your appeal process until you place the damages you owe into escrow?
Just to make sure I'm getting this correctly. I love learning ways that dumps can't protect himself
So in other words Trump appealing the verdict is the best way to guarantee Carroll will get the money because it means he can't skip out on the payment.
Fantastic
The requested bond is generally an amount greater than the judgment sum—CPLR 5519 requires that post-judgment interest and cost are included in the amount. New York State has a 9% statutory interest running on any judgment entered. In New York State, we set the bond amount at 120% of the judgment.
Probably closer to $100 million after the 120%👍
Rad, thanks
He will have to put up nearly 100 million in cash or other assets to get his appeal. He already did that for the original case. If his appeals fail, the court will cut her a check.
$83MM paid for by the hordes of morons that eat his shit daily. He won't spend a penny.
less money for his other cases and even less for the campaign. The morons aren’t a bottomless pit of money
There's a fucking idiot born every few seconds, and at the same pace there's a (so far) boundless font of working-class hopium cash willing to throw their pension in the proverbial fountain for the promise of fucking over anyone who isn't them. 🤦🏼♂️
If it pulls money from his campaign (which is likely), I am here with the shaudenfreude and popcorn 🍿
“Absolutely ridiculous! I fully disagree with both verdicts, and will be appealing this whole Biden Directed Witch Hunt focused on me and the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Our Legal System is out of control, and being used as a Political Weapon.”
Says the man who's making this political...
This had nothing to do with Biden or the Republican Party... He's been tried & found guilty of defaming E. Jean Carroll.
You know this... I know this... Literates know this...
His cultists on the other hand? That shit was rolled up, fried, and gobbled down like an Independence Day barbecue. The entitled ape is actively trying to spearhead the start of an American Civil War II because he didn't win.
...for raping her. He could have not sexually assaulted her, he could have not defamed her, he could have not defamed her a second time. All problems of his own making. I've never even imagined this level of "find out" even existed.
But it has to be said: Republicans are still solidly behind him, this is who they want! Absolutely disgusting...
Breaking it down:
Absolutely ridiculous! I fully disagree with both verdicts
Well, that's not surprising...
and will be appealing this whole Biden Directed Witch Hunt
Biden has nothing, NOTHING, to do with a New York civil case.
focused on me and the Republican Party
No, it's just you.
Our Legal System is out of control, and being used as a Political Weapon.
It would be so much worse for you if that were true.
They have taken away all First Amendment Rights! THIS IS NOT AMERICA!
You don't have the right to repeatedly defame someone when you ALREADY lost a lawsuit for defaming them.
Speech is free, lies are expensive.
[...] where he is the likely nominee for the Republican Party. He is also facing a total of 91 felony counts across federal charges in Washington, D.C., and Florida and state charges in New York and Georgia.
Just want to point out this gem of a paragraph out the bottom of the article...
Less than a decade ago I'd have laughed if you told me that someone could be currently in trial for best part of 100 felony charges, on top of having already been impeached for attempted insurrection, and still legitimately be a candidate for president of the United States
Less than a decade ago? Were you around to vote against Bush Sr's backbirth the first term? Were you there when he got judges to grant him his second? "Less than a decade" is a naive breadth of scope in politics, all due respect.
Bush Sr. was never indicted. He should have been for Iran-Contra, but he wasn't. Trump has 91 indictments. That's how much worse he's been than Bush Sr.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Whitehouse: I can't hear you over all of this money..
Notice how he didn't immediately start defaming her this time? I guess the amount was right!
Not sure if The Hill was on autopilot or not, but they didn't need to call it "alleged" rape, it's been proven in a court.
That it was is quite literally a basis of this defamation case...
Legally speaking, the finding of fact was "sexual abuse," because of a very stupid legal definition of "rape."
Nobody knows more about raping women, harassment and losing defamation cases than Donald Trump, believe me.
Hopefully his buddy Vince will join him in losing cases
load more comments
(1 replies)
That alleged is unnecessary, this has been settled, Trump did sexualy assault E. Jean Carroll.
load more comments
(1 replies)
OK, let him bleed more on the next level. I mean, he already continued to harass and attack his victim again.
Time for bitch boy to put his money where his mouth is.
Yeah, but what will Putin do with all that cash up his ass?
Wonder what he’s gonna say when he’s (hopefully) found guilty of his crimes in association with January 6th and the election BS in general
I don't expect him to come up with anything new. He'll just repeat the same old things. Biden is on a witch hunt against him and the court system is corrupt and all that. He's found his favorite tune I think
At that point about the best he can manage is probably writhing on the floor, frothing at the mouth and chewing the rugs.
Looks like my best chance at ever becoming a millionaire is to sue Trump.
I feel like I could probably trick him into defaming me somehow
The trick is to make him think you’re loyal to him first and then you can say anything to get thrown under the defamation bus
Best case, you'd get a gallon of bronzer and a few frozen steaks
That's a gallon of bronzer and a few frozen steaks up from how I'm doing now. I'll take it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'm looking forward to seeing him somehow manage to double current fine with this.
That's RIGHT! BIDEN had E. Jean Carroll LUST after Trump JUST so she could sue him DECADES later! I need to DONATE to Trump QUICK to FIGHT this Biden Tatorship!
Of course he will. Anything to deny one of his victims of compensations.
To appeal, I think he has to pay a $65 Million bond, and this is certain to be reiterated. The jury did an excellent job at not being overly punishing. He’s screwed in so many ways. He better don’t ever mention her name again in his life.
It's like she wished for a money printing machine from a monkey's paw.
So, you’re saying she found a way to monitize his inability to shut the fuck up?
If only he actually had that 83 mil….
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Of course he will, this isn't a surprise to anyone. He's still going to lose, but that's just on brand for him.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former President Trump said Friday he plans to appeal after a jury ordered him to pay $83.3 million for defaming writer E. Jean Carroll, who had alleged he sexually assaulted her decades ago.
I fully disagree with both verdicts, and will be appealing this whole Biden Directed Witch Hunt focused on me and the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
Friday’s ruling by a jury in New York marked the second time Carroll has won damages from Trump at trial, with the new total adding to a $5 million verdict last year finding Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll and defaming her over a separate comment.
U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, an appointee of former President Clinton who oversaw the trial, had already ruled Trump defamed Carroll.
The former president claimed — and still does — that Carroll was lying and made up the accusation to sell her book.
At a CNN town hall event last May, Trump called Carroll a “whack job” and insisted he did not know her.
The original article contains 292 words, the summary contains 166 words. Saved 43%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Why can’t I harass my rape victims? THIS IS NOT AMERICA!
He just sees it as "ridiculous" as he never understood anyone who said "no" or "don't do this" to him.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
179 points (91.2% liked)
politics
19096 readers
2780 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS