Post trump Legal Actions, Including his Enablers

[GeorgiaDon 340]

3 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Works for me. While Willis is probably the more competent, I think that Wade is a little less tainted, because he wasn't the one in power.

Because my opinion matters... 

Wendy P.

Your opinion always matters.

However, if Willis takes herself off the case, that would mean taking her entire prosecution office off the case.  That would require reassigning the case to a different prosecutor's office elsewhere in the state, which would mean that new prosecutor (if anyone would agree to take the case) would start all over, beginning with reviewing everything and deciding what charges (if any) to pursue.  Everything would be delayed by many months at a minimum, and it might well never get to trial.

OTOH Wade could be replaced and the prosecution would continue through Willis's office, likely with not much delay.

[wmw999 2,122]

1 minute ago, GeorgiaDon said:

Your opinion always matters.

However, if Willis takes herself off the case, that would mean taking her entire prosecution office off the case.  That would require reassigning the case to a different prosecutor's office elsewhere in the state, which would mean that new prosecutor (if anyone would agree to take the case) would start all over, beginning with reviewing everything and deciding what charges (if any) to pursue.  Everything would be delayed by many months at a minimum, and it might well never get to trial.

OTOH Wade could be replaced and the prosecution would continue through Willis's office, likely with not much delay.

Yeah, I heard that later on the radio. And since the judgment said that this is much more an “appearance of conflict” rather than actual conflict, I’ll happily stand down from that opinion.

I do wonder how she thought it would play any differently when found out, though  

Wendy P. 

[billvon 2,400]

So after trying (and failing) to impeach Biden, republicans are now trying another strategy - making criminal referrals to the DOJ.  This means basically suggesting "hey why don't you investigate this Biden guy and charge him with something."  Given that even the Biden-hating House republicans can't find anything to impeach him for (which has a far lower bar than an indictment) odds of success are between slim and none.

So why try?  Apparently James Comer, chairman of the Oversight Committee, had a chance meeting with Trump, and came away with this plan.  So it's likely coming from Trump as a way for republicans to "save face" and make it look like they are doing something.  And, of course, give Trump some ammunition for more attacks on Biden.

[wmw999 2,122]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

And, of course, give Trump some ammunition for more attacks on Biden.

as well as a new promise -- to install an entire new Justice department of biddable minions

Wendy P.

[ryoder 1,384]

So little Donny doesn't have the money?

Trump Says He Doesn’t Have Means to Post Bond in NY Fraud Case

...Trump's team is asserting that there are no bond companies that are willing to take real estate as collateral for a judgment of this magnitude...

Especially from a deadbeat grifter.

Edited March 18 by ryoder

[gowlerk 1,912]

7 minutes ago, ryoder said:

So little Donny doesn't have the money?

Trump Says He Doesn’t Have Means to Post Bond in NY Fraud Case

...Trump's team is asserting that there are no bond companies that are willing to take real estate as collateral for a judgment of this magnitude...

Especially from a deadbeat grifter.

It's a bitch when suddenly you run out of excuses and dodges and you have to pay what you owe. 

[ryoder 1,384]

8 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

It's a bitch when suddenly you run out of excuses and dodges and you have to pay what you owe. 

I have this fantasy of a blond-haired thug shoving his face into a toilet bowl:

"Where's the money Donny?  Alina said you're good for it!  Where's the money, shithead???"

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

25 minutes ago, ryoder said:

So little Donny doesn't have the money?

Trump Says He Doesn’t Have Means to Post Bond in NY Fraud Case

...Trump's team is asserting that there are no bond companies that are willing to take real estate as collateral for a judgment of this magnitude...

Especially from a deadbeat grifter.

It's been noted that for DECADES, Trump would milk the system and delay legal cases against him, often for years, until the person he screwed over gave up. Often because without the money he ripped them off for, they had to close down. Some committed suicide.

It's REALLY nice to see that they just keep going and going. That his delay tactics are just failing left and right.
His idiot 'attorney', Habba, said that James's efforts to seize Trump's assets 'won't be successful'.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4483371-trump-lawyer-habba-brushes-off-ny-ag-threat-seize-assets/#:~:text=Court Battles-,Trump lawyer Alina Habba brushes off NY AG threat to,It will not be successful'&text=Alina Habba%2C an attorney for,his civil business fraud trial.

Somehow, I don't think James will have too much difficulty convincing a court that Trump either can't or won't pay, and for a court to seize assets in that situation is actually very common.

I really can't wait to see that happen.
And Trumpty Dumpty's reactions.

Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll have a stroke. On live TV.
No, I'm not a very nice person.

[nigel99 144]

20 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

It's a bitch when suddenly you run out of excuses and dodges and you have to pay what you owe. 

It will be very interesting to see if this has any impact on his followers. 

I suspect it will, probably more so than a conviction. A conviction can be explained away by 'a corrupt legal system', whereas a so caller Billionaire unable to secure a bond is harder to spin

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Just now, nigel99 said:

It will be very interesting to see if this has any impact on his followers. 

I suspect it will, probably more so than a conviction. A conviction can be explained away by 'a corrupt legal system', whereas a so caller Billionaire unable to secure a bond is harder to spin

Unfortunately, they're too stupid to realize that they've been conned.

Too deep into the cult to get out.

I don't think it will change much of the ~25% that are 'hardcore MAGA morons'.

However, a fair amount of those who voted for Nikki Haley said that they wouldn't vote for Trump if he was convicted of a felony.

[Faicon9493 114]

Now, Donald Trump is claiming that he can't make the 464 million dollar bond in his civil fraud case. Don't be fooled. It's not that Donald Trump doesn't have the money. He doesn't have enough OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY!

[nigel99 144]

1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Unfortunately, they're too stupid to realize that they've been conned.

Too deep into the cult to get out.

I don't think it will change much of the ~25% that are 'hardcore MAGA morons'.

However, a fair amount of those who voted for Nikki Haley said that they wouldn't vote for Trump if he was convicted of a felony.

I disagree. Ironically more sophisticated voters understand that a very wealthy person doesn't necessarily have liquid assets and I suspect they would be more empathetic towards Trump. Whereas Trump base (even Habba his lawyer) don't understand the nuances and think he's got cash in the bank. Those same people do understand how bonds work though and that the money gets given back if he wins.

Regardless it will be interesting to see. I've only seen one Vote Trump flag here in rural Georgia in the last week, I expected a lot more.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

1 hour ago, nigel99 said:

I disagree. Ironically more sophisticated voters understand that a very wealthy person doesn't necessarily have liquid assets and I suspect they would be more empathetic towards Trump. Whereas Trump base (even Habba his lawyer) don't understand the nuances and think he's got cash in the bank. Those same people do understand how bonds work though and that the money gets given back if he wins.

Regardless it will be interesting to see. I've only seen one Vote Trump flag here in rural Georgia in the last week, I expected a lot more.

Well, Trump claimed to have something like $400 million 'cash in the bank'.

And even without that sort of cash, if he was a REAL 'rich man', he'd be able to get a loan or bond of some sort.

But he's NOT RICH. He's mortgaged to the hilt, doesn't really own much of what has his name on it and is pretty much a fraud in ALL ASPECTS.

No bank will loan him money. Nobody will do business with him anymore (except maybe the Russians).

The saddest part of all of this is that as the courts seize his assets, the amount they will be able to recoup after selling the stuff off and paying the creditors will be pretty damned small. 
The only upside to this is that bankruptcy won't help him.

Court settlements aren't dischargeable in a bankruptcy. Those debts will follow him to the grave.

[billvon 2,400]

1 hour ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Well, Trump claimed to have something like $400 million 'cash in the bank'.

And even without that sort of cash, if he was a REAL 'rich man', he'd be able to get a loan or bond of some sort.

Even if they are in the form of investments (stocks, bonds, equity funds etc.) the bank will always give you a loan against them.  It's zero risk free money for them.  They get interest, and if you default, they sell your investments to recoup their costs.

[ryoder 1,384]

Supreme Court Chief Justice Denies Ex-Trump Aide Peter Navarro's Bid to Stave off Prison Sentence

Awwww...the poor little lackey must face the consequences of his own actions.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Even if they are in the form of investments (stocks, bonds, equity funds etc.) the bank will always give you a loan against them.  It's zero risk free money for them.  They get interest, and if you default, they sell your investments to recoup their costs.

Been there at a seriously lower level and not only is it easy the rates are great. Even if he has $400 Million that could easily be the floor of what his current lenders require for liquidity. There is still a week to go, that his lawyers have been begging for lower amounts or just an IOU for three weeks tells it all: he is broke.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

2 hours ago, billvon said:

Even if they are in the form of investments (stocks, bonds, equity funds etc.) the bank will always give you a loan against them.  It's zero risk free money for them.  They get interest, and if you default, they sell your investments to recoup their costs.

The loan tends to be pretty standard for most private banking or wealth management customers as a percentage of their net worth.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

The loan tends to be pretty standard for most private banking or wealth management customers as a percentage of their net worth.

Sure, but don't most of those have enough unencumbered liquidity to make the loan easy? I'm thinking that Trump Tower isn't a juicy cross collateralization asset, nor any of his other properties.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

14 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Sure, but don't most of those have enough unencumbered liquidity to make the loan easy? I'm thinking that Trump Tower isn't a juicy cross collateralization asset, nor any of his other properties.

Unencumbered equity, not unencumbered liquidity. The loan is there to provide liquidity.

Trump is probably running into a multitude of problems. He is convicted of lying about his assets. The assets are likely heavily cross collaterized. The office market is currently absolute shit and I wouldn't be surprised if many of his assets are under water. Lastly, it is unlikely he is going to win on appeal. The amount might get reduced a little, but more likely than not, he is going to have to pay.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

2 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Unencumbered equity, not unencumbered liquidity. The loan is there to provide liquidity.

Trump is probably running into a multitude of problems. He is convicted of lying about his assets. The assets are likely heavily cross collaterized. The office market is currently absolute shit and I wouldn't be surprised if many of his assets are under water. Lastly, it is unlikely he is going to win on appeal. The amount might get reduced a little, but more likely than not, he is going to have to pay.

Yes, but I did mean liquidity. Stocks, bonds, etc that are liquid but inconvenient or expensive to sell. 

[SkyDekker 1,122]

25 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Yes, but I did mean liquidity. Stocks, bonds, etc that are liquid but inconvenient or expensive to sell. 

If I have $100 million in unencumbered real estate my bank would happily provide a revolving line of credit for $40 million. If I had  a net worth of $2 billion, I am sure a bank would happily provide a $400 million revolver. Unless my net worth was measured 2 years ago and much of my holdings are in office assets....that Mark to Market has dropped a bit since then.

[ryoder 1,384]

Awww...George Stephanopolis hurt little Donny's feelings.

NYT: Trump Sues ABC and Stephanopoulos, Saying They Defamed Him

[billvon 2,400]

2 hours ago, ryoder said:

Awww...George Stephanopolis hurt little Donny's feelings.

NYT: Trump Sues ABC and Stephanopoulos, Saying They Defamed Him

So jury found Trump liable for sexual assault, an offense which, according to the judge, covers what people commonly describe as "rape."

So Stephanopoulos said that Trump had been found liable for raping E. Jean Carroll.

Now Trump is suing him for defamation.

He keeps using that word.  I don't think that word means what Trump thinks it means - namely "someone said something that pissed me off."

[kallend 1,623]

7 hours ago, billvon said:

So jury found Trump liable for sexual assault, an offense which, according to the judge, covers what people commonly describe as "rape."

So Stephanopoulos said that Trump had been found liable for raping E. Jean Carroll.

Now Trump is suing him for defamation.

He keeps using that word.  I don't think that word means what Trump thinks it means - namely "someone said something that pissed me off."

 "The finding that Ms.  Carroll failed to prove that she was “raped” within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does   not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump “raped” her as many people commonly understand the word “rape.” Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that." ;    LEWIS A. KAPLAN, District Judge, 7/19/2023

So why didn't DT sue the judge too?

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

So why didn't DT sue the judge too?

Because the judge didn't go on TV and say it.

If it wasn't on TV, Donny probably isn't aware of it.

If it was in print, Donny definitely isn't aware of it.