274
Scathing court ruling on Donald Trump’s empire is a bitter blow to his successful tycoon persona
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
274 points (97.2% liked)
News
23407 readers
5106 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
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.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Again, says it's a death blow for the corporation, not him. Also doesn't say that he doesn't get to profit.
None of what I've said has contradicted anything that she said, so it's not the "either or" situation you're imagining it to be.
Why you seem to think his corporation going under doesn't hurt him at all is beyond me. It's like if Tim Cook became a politician and you claiming that Apple going under because of an antitrust case doesn't hurt Tim Cook. Of course it would. He's built his entire reputation on being a successful businessman.
I'm not saying it doesn't hurt him at all, I'm saying it doesn't hurt him anywhere near enough.
If Tim Cook pivoted to getting many times more of his personal income from political scams than from Apple, then your comparison MIGHT make sense, except even then it would be very far from an apples to apples comparison, pun intended.
He's built his image on PRETENDING to be successful businessman and then pivoting to leader of a Christofascist cult.
He was never good at business (as evidenced by losing a billion dollars total in a decade where every other ultrarich person was profiting like crazy) and he no longer needs the real estate empire.
Considering his debt was $1.3 billion in 2021, I'm pretty sure political donations won't be enough to save him financially.
It's still enough to more than cover the fine in 8 weeks.
Sorry... you're saying he will raise a the same amount in 8 weeks as he did right after the election when everyone was fired up? And not cover all of his expenses but still pay all of his debt?
This is a little silly.
No. I'm saying that he'll raise that and more right after playing the marty, which is getting his cult all riled up. Might take longer than 8 weeks but he's definitely going to get there. Nothing silly about acknowledging that tragic yet inescapable fact of his cult appeal.
Why would he raise more than he raised after the election over this court case? How is he going to raise $1.2 billion on top of all of his expenses, which runs into the tens if not hundreds of millions?
Even if he didn't want to spend it on election expenses, he has a bunch of criminal cases he needs to pay for before he can even think about touching his debt.
So basically, you're claiming that this won't hurt him at all because he'll raise billions of dollars, more than he's ever raised before, when there's absolutely no sign of that happening.
Well, I guess the Trump business should be allowed to continue to operate in New York since this doesn't matter. Not sure why they even had a civil case in the first place.
Over more time and by playing the persecuted martyr. Do try to keep up.
Him being a bad enough businessman to lose that much even while cheating had nothing to do with the case or our discussion about the outcome of it. Please don't move the goalposts.
No, I'm saying it won't hurt him much in the long run. There's a difference.
Again, leave those goalposts alone.
Nobody's said that. Don't start with the strawmen.
You're sorta right: should have been a criminal case in the first place since it was a case about him committing criminal fraud crime, which is not a civil matter.
You absolutely are suggesting that. You're saying this won't hurt him. You're saying he will definitely raise $1.2 billion on top of all of his expenses now that the Trump business is effectively dissolved. So that means there was absolutely no point in dissolving it. Why dissolve it if it does nothing?
I absolutely am not. I'm saying that this won't hurt him MUCH compared to all the shit he's been pulling.
I've said nothing of the kind. You're the one who decided to move the goalposts by bringing up the completely irrelevant 1.2b
Again, not what I'm saying. Do you know how to read, understand and remember words? Because you're sure as fuck not acting like it! 🤦
Ok, if you're going to start hurling insults, this conversation is over. I'm not interested in a Reddit-style flame war.
And I'm not interested in repeatedly defending against a wholly fictional version of what I've said and moved goalposts, so stopping is fine by me. Have the day you deserve.
"Have the day you deserve?" Wow. Yeah, that was warranted over an internet argument. I don't wish you "have the day you deserve." Whatever people who insult over the internet when they wouldn't do that if they were in the same room with that person deserve. I wish you have a good day. Because I don't want people to have bad days.
Well you've made my day worse with your strawmen and your goalpost moving and your stubborn condescension, so why should I wish for yours to be good?
I made your day worse? Seriously? This is the internet. Why are you letting a silly argument about Trump affect your day?
And you should wish for everyone's day to be good even if yours isn't because that's called being a compassionate person.
I still hope you have a good day.
Again, says it's a death blow for the corporation, not him. Also doesn't say that he doesn't get to profit.
None of what I've said has contradicted anything that she said, so it's not the "either or" situation you're imagining it to be.
The fine itself is less than what he raised in 8 weeks to pretend to investigate imaginary election fraud.