779
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Less than a month after New York Attorney General Letitia James said she would be willing to seize former Republican President Donald Trump's assets if he is unable to pay the $464 million required by last month's judgment in his civil fraud case, Trump's lawyers disclosed in court filings Monday that he had failed to secure a bond for the amount. 

In the nearly 5,000-page filing, lawyers for Trump said it has proven a "practical impossibility" for Trump to secure a bond from any financial institutions in the state, as "about 30 surety companies" have refused to accept assets including real estate as collateral and have demanded cash and other liquid assets instead.

To get the institutions to agree to cover that $464 million judgment if Trump loses his appeal and fails to pay the state, he would have to pledge more than $550 million as collateral—"a sum he simply does not have," reportedThe New York Times, despite his frequent boasting of his wealth and business prowess.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 166 points 3 months ago
[-] [email protected] 65 points 3 months ago

Winning so hard it hurts

[-] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago

The Sound of His Squeal

[-] [email protected] 156 points 3 months ago

Why would he need to raise the money? He told the court he had $500M in liquid assets.

Could it be that he was being untruthful in his statement to the court? I think there is a word for that.

[-] [email protected] 51 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

He testified to $400M, and he already put up a $100M bond for the other thing. But the whole point of this is that he overvalues things, right? I bet when his people had to get down to the actual state of the accounts and not what DJT feels they are, it was probably only $200M or so that is liquid.

It's not worth going after him again for overstating that in court. It's too easy to skirt around. His punishment will come when the DA starts seizing and auctioning stuff to pay the judgement.

[-] [email protected] 29 points 3 months ago

He put up I believe $2m for the other thing. The rest was covered by the bond company.

So he should still have at least $398m if he claimed 400...

[-] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago

That's not quite how it works. When the bond company writes the bond, they don't just take the $2m from the client and then the client is off the hook. They ask the client to put up collateral. So in order for Trump to secure this bond, he would have had to set aside the full amount of the bond and say "If the verdict doesn't get reduced on appeal, I am giving you all this stuff, and not using it for anything else in the meantime".

All Trump is getting for that fee is not actually having to sell those assets now, and have any overage refunded if the appeal gets the verdict reduced. (Given the interest rates right now, the passive income on that kind of cash is not trivial).

[-] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

True, but we were talking only about liquid assets here, I thought. Otherwise, what would the $400m you mentioned be referring to? Or - what specifically did you mean and do you have a source by any chance?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

I suspect that trump life is over if he fails to win in November, he will either take it himself or it will be effectively over bc he will be in jail and penny less. To that end he does not care about consequences of some extra crimes in the near term.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

Nah, he'll start screaming about rigged elections and try for a coup.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

THAT he will do regardless of election outcome

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

He's a serial narcissist. Maybe one of the worst in the current world.

No way does he take his own life. That would require having empathy, which he absolutely does not have.

No. trump won't take his own life. He's not committed to any cause like someone like Hitler, nor does he feel backed into a corner.

What he'll do instead is pander/cater to his unhinged base and con them out of what little money they have left.

That's all after he pillages the coffers of the RNC for what he can use there to pay for his legal fees/woes.

It's possible, and I don't want to hope for too much here, but it's possible, that trump maybe legit takes down most of the RNC/republicans if he fails to win in November.

If he wins though, I think we're all pretty fucked. He'll use tax money to pay for that judgement or some shit. He has no morals, ethics, or shame.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] csm10495 15 points 3 months ago

Maybe he was talking in terms of Zimbabwe dollars

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[-] [email protected] 122 points 3 months ago

I'll believe it when it happens.

Last time he had one lined up but up until the last second said it was impossible. Likely to maximize donations from his rubes.

[-] [email protected] 29 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Re: Donations, I saw this today. So it may not be that easy (ha!!).

Behind Trump’s campaign cash crunch: Small-dollar donor fatigue, major donor hesitation

KEY POINTS

  • Former President Donald Trump is facing two major fundraising problems: a shortage of big money interest and a drop in small-dollar donor support.
  • The decline in small-dollar contributors could be a significant obstacle, as the former president seeks to cobble together a 2024 war chest.
  • Small-dollar donors are critical to Trump’s ability to raise enough money to fund his presidential campaign.
[-] [email protected] 89 points 3 months ago

If you owe the bank half a billion dollars, it’s the bank’s problem right?

Sounds like the banks don’t want this problem.

[-] [email protected] 81 points 3 months ago

Wait, how in the world could this have been a 5000-page filing? Is the entire text of War and Peace included 3 times in an appendix?

[-] [email protected] 95 points 3 months ago

The point is to make the case difficult and time consuming, hoping to cause a delay. One common method I have seen is to print every email in an email chain. The efficient way would be to print the last email in a 30 reply long chain and have it make up about 5 pages of the filing. Instead of doing that though, you can print every email in the chain and turn it in to 50+ pages pretty easily. Trump does not want this case to be handled efficiently and having a 5000+ lage filing, full of repeated and unnecessary information is one way to make that happen.

load more comments (35 replies)
[-] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago

Maybe it included documents or correspondence from each of the 30 attempts? That would still be absurdly long at over 150 pages of documentation per attempt. But I could see them trying to make a point through the sheer volume of pages.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 75 points 3 months ago

I wouldn’t normally put this much stock in his assets actually getting flipped, but…

Someone or some company signed me up for Trump fundraising emails recently. The subject line of one from 2(?) days ago read: HANDS OFF TRUMP TOWER, so it sounds like they’re preparing some kind of mobilization/campaign to play the victim now that their options are quickly drying up.

[-] [email protected] 32 points 3 months ago

I think I'd actually welcome that tactic from the Trump campaign. The base aren't going to change their mind no matter what they hear but I'd be willing to bet a good portion of swing voters will hear about Trump losing his tower and realize that hey, maybe he's actually not a great businessman. It makes him look weak when the only tactic that really works for him is the strongman one.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jballs 30 points 3 months ago

it sounds like they’re preparing some kind of mobilization/campaign to play the victim now that their options are quickly drying up.

Not disagreeing with you, but just wanted to point out that's kind of their thing already.

[-] [email protected] 18 points 3 months ago

Oh for sure, the spoiled child is ready for their tantrum du jour.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

Letitia James did say she had her eye on that building in particular, so of course they want to keep it out of her hands.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 71 points 3 months ago

“about 30 surety companies” have refused to accept assets

well yeah they're lending him money to pay off a court judgment against him for lying about what those assets are worth. I wouldn't lend someone money if their collateral was worth anywhere from 10%-1000% of what I lent them and there was no way for me to verify either. Besides, you know if he owes you money it's gonna be years and millions before you can recoup anything at all.

[-] Socsa 70 points 3 months ago

Remember he testified that he had that kind of liquidity several times. He is absolutely fucked.

[-] [email protected] 41 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Ok guys, i dont want to sound like a conspiricy theorist or anything, but sometimes i get a slight suspicion that he might be lying to make himself look better...

[-] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

No waaay. Why would a guy with a gold toilette have an ego like that?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 57 points 3 months ago

...nearly 5,000-page filing...

Really? They generated more content than the entire Harry Potter series to say "He can't get the money."

Sounds like they're trying to get their own $464M out of the deal.

[-] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago

How is that even possible good lord? 5000 pages?

[-] [email protected] 32 points 3 months ago

Odds are there are charts, graphs, and other items that are inconsequential to the overall argument. Also could include the full rejection letters.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yeah I would guess its all of the submitted documents back and forth 30 times. Even just 150 pages each would net 5000 pages.

[-] [email protected] 55 points 3 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] [email protected] 43 points 3 months ago

They’re gonna take some of his properties and find lots of other crimes in those closets.

[-] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago

Crimes and hamburder wrappers

[-] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

Crimes and hamburder wrappers

You just named the inevitable trump saga movie.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 40 points 3 months ago
[-] crazyCat 34 points 3 months ago

You love to see it.

[-] LopensLeftArm 22 points 3 months ago
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago

I would love to see Trump Tower rebranded to something like Barack Obama Tower, just to piss him off even more.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago

If Trump hadn't riled up his supporters into storming Congress on Jan 6th and hadn't spurred the authorities into forensically investigating him, I wonder how far ahead he'd be of Biden.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 3 months ago

All those people who told me they voted for him because he was rich and therefore couldn't be bought seem to have gone very quiet.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2024
779 points (99.0% liked)

politics

18138 readers
3680 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS