this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
374 points (97.5% liked)

politics

19144 readers
3051 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • Donald Trump has to cut a fat check, and his appeal of the E. Jean Carroll verdict won't delay that.
  • Within 30 days of the judge's written judgment, Trump has to turn over either cash or a bond.
  • While he appeals the verdict, Carroll can't touch that money — but neither can Trump.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rapidcreek 16 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I think it would be hard for anyone to risk 88 million to post a bond in any case. Trump is going to have to write the check.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

To put a possible US president in your pocket? Plently of people would smile as they wrote that check.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Lending money to Trump doesn't put him in your pocket because he just doesn't pay his debts and somehow manages to always get away with it.

[–] Rapidcreek -2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I'd like to name one. If there is anyone with 88 million to spare, that same person values money more than Trump.

[–] Clent 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There were billionaires who donated as much Trump 2020 PACs so it's not completely unreasonable. However those billionaires likely did so control political messaging, it's not clear what they could gain here but I am not a billionaire.

I highly doubt the money will come out of Trumps personal funds, he has been fundraising for years and will likely continue to use those funds to pay for things.

[–] Rapidcreek 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He's already been warned that he can't spend donated funds to pay the fine.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

He's received plenty of warnings but no repercussions. So he will continue stealing from charities and misusing campaign funds until there is an actual consequence.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

Home Depot guy.

[–] Passerby6497 1 points 10 months ago

ElMu pissed away $44 BILLION on Twitter to take over and destroy a public information spreading platform, do you really think that someone on his level wouldn't toss away $88 million to own the potential US president?

[–] themeatbridge 9 points 10 months ago

I wonder if he can secure it with rubles...

[–] overzeetop 5 points 10 months ago

If you’ve already put $2B in trust with his son in law, what’s an extra 5% to keep daddy happy. It’s just a down payment for future intelligence.