• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    136
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Trump and his company need to post a bond for the full amount by next week in order to stop New York Attorney General Letitia James from being able to collect while he appeals.

    He doesn’t have the cash to pay, so when NY collects, they can start forcing sales on his property.

    If he gets the bond, then it just sits there till after appeals. Which would prevent him from selling property he put up for bond, but he’d still own them.

    If he misses that bond, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate

  • WaxiestSteam69@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    103
    ·
    9 months ago

    The fact that no bond companies would accept real property as a collateral for the bond and only liquid or easily liquified assets points to the properties being leveraged to the hilt. If he ends up having to pay even a portion of this and has to start selling properties we should see a true picture of his financial status.

    • homura1650@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      9 months ago

      Additionally, this judgment is for his civil fraud trial. Where he was found liable for inflating the value of his properties in order to obtain loans against them.

      Given that, I can understand a general reluctance to loan against the value of his properties.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      9 months ago

      Imagine if he wins the election and is flat broke. He’ll auction off everything the US owns in exchange for a cut or finder’s fee. And let’s not pretend that the emoluments clause actually applies to any of elected leaders.

      • Tyfud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        63
        ·
        9 months ago

        We don’t have to imagine too hard here. The fact that he’s even able to run for president again is a travesty of justice.

      • WaxiestSteam69@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think the reason it was such an issue with Trump is I can’t think of another president that had the infrastructure (i.e. his hotels) to make revenue via emoluments.

        • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          9 months ago

          Carter was a peanut farmer and those peanuts were sold internationally. He sold the farm before being elected so as not to be in violation of the emoluments clause.

          • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            9 months ago

            Just setting the record straight. Carter put his farm in a blind trust. And I agree that Trump isn’t fit to clean Carter’s outhouse

          • WaxiestSteam69@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Didn’t W divest a bunch of stuff and setup a blind trust for the same reason. And if I’m remembering correctly didn’t the peanut farm had been Carter’s family for a while so he gave up something that meant something more than money.

            • evatronic@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              23
              ·
              9 months ago

              Every president save Trump in modern times has had various assets and investments, and they have all put them in blind trusts during their terms.

    • A Phlaming Phoenix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      So if he falls to make bond and the state starts seizing assets, how does that work, exactly? They auction it to pay the lawsuit? What if Trump gets a bite on selling a property intending to make bond but it’s a big real estate transaction and that takes time? Will he be allowed to finish the sale before the state seizes assets?

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        They’d be best to sieze and sell the assets independent of Trump. Chances are he will sell stuff to certain people with Slavic accents, and then we’ll have a potential president even further beholden to enemies of the state, which is generally considered sub-optimal.

      • nucleative@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        The government people who are in charge of collecting the dough from this judgment will be wise to the possibility that he may not have a bonafide buyer and that he’s just fluffing if he says a deal is about to go through.

        Any buyer will know that he’s a motivated seller so the offers aren’t going to be all that great.

        When the government seizes banks that are about to fail, usually they seem to find qualified buyers privately and the deal is over within days.

        I have a feeling that because Trump has allowed things to get to this point, the government is less interested in selling at the highest price possible and instead will take any offer that settles the debt.

      • obviouspornalt@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I’m wondering what priority the state has over existing lienholders. If State has priority, then some banks may be about to get hosed.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      He won’t. I just can’t imagine he’s not going to find some bad actor to step in before that happens. Possibly SA.

      • radicalautonomy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        some bad actor to step in before that happens. Possibly SA.

        Shohreh Aghdashloo is one of the finest actors of our time. You shut your damn mouth.

        Edit: Sorry, I just figured out you meant South America. Yeah, I hate that country, too…buncha jerks.

    • eric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The aggression in Liotta’s laugher makes it the most appropriate gif.

    • gregorum@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Applying for emergency funding grant from my workplace to move back home and get a new home. Things are actually looking pretty good for me after seven months of living a complete and utter nightmare. When I got the news that I will probably be given the financial assistance I finally need as long as my paperwork is in line, I had to step off the sales floor and going to the bathroom and cry a little bit. I had a really good day today.

      It’s been A really long time since had something to hope for

      Thanks for asking

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    9 months ago

    Gee, he can’t pay for his business fraud judgments with his sneaker fraud or his nft trading card fraud?

    What about all the bribes he illegally and treasonously accepted by premiers of hostile countries?

      • Chocrates@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Sadly he posted bond on E. Jean Carol’s settlement so she won’t see a dime for years as it goes through appeals

        • KidnappedByKitties@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          On the first one, yes. This is the second one, that he’s failed to post bond for, and won’t be allowed to appeal unless he can.

          The third was videotaped as he walked out of the verdict on the second.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Dumps showed up at a sneaker convention a few days after receiving his 454-million dollar civil fraud judgment with some boxes of gold sneakers that cost $399 a pair in a typically transparent ploy to cover his costs.

        Allegedly, his 1000 "never surrender high tops sold out, though he hasn’t paid any of that sentence yet and the thousand available pairs would cover less than .1% of his fines for that single judgment.

        Also, a lot of people booed him when he showed up at the convention.

        Fox hosts notably thought this was a great way for trump to be "connecting with Black America. Because they’re into sneakers, they love sneakers. This is a big deal. Certainly in the inner city.”

    • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      As much as I want Trump to be locked up, it would have to be for one of his multiple criminal indictments. Locking people up for not being able to pay fines is basically recreating debtors prisons and is hugely unfair to poor people.

        • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Sort of. The Supreme Court said you cannot be jailed for not being able to pay a fine, only for willingly not paying a fine that you can afford to pay. However, it is up to a judge’s discretion as to whether a person can afford a fine or not.

          In this case, Trump has a lot of properties he can sell to pay a fine.