440
submitted 1 month ago by vegeta to c/politics
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 95 points 1 month ago

Sounds like more fraud.

[-] [email protected] 80 points 1 month ago

But the flimsy delay tactic that wouldn’t have worked for anyone else, worked flawlessly- right in our faces.

So in a way- it was a total success.

[-] RedditWanderer 30 points 1 month ago

So can we all use this as precedent to skirt the law? "See mister Trump got a reduction on his bond, can I get it too?

They'll laugh in our face, because those laws are only for the poor.

[-] FlowVoid 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

can we all use this

You can certainly try. Bond reductions are rare, but this is not the first time it's happened

He and his employees had handled thousands of bonds. In that time, he's heard of only about a couple dozen instances when a New York appeals court reduced an appeal bond.

[-] Serinus 11 points 1 month ago

Good lawyers can be good at stalling. If that's your only priority, they can do a decent job of it. Even better if you can find any kind of complications for the court to deal with. A particularly good complication is being the Republican nominee for president, if you can manage that.

He's just trying to stall until election season to claim it's all politically motivated and use it in his campaign.

[-] Eatspancakes84 5 points 1 month ago

Yeah and that’s the annoying thing. If you or I are in trouble in court it’s likely in our benefit if things are settled quickly, if only to minimise billable hours for our lawyer. It’s only the very rich that really benefit from drawn out procedures.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Not even for the poor. Just not for the mega-rich.

[-] just_another_person 71 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I thought they were already moving to have it thrown out and start seizure proceedings last week? What's taking so long?

[-] FlowVoid 55 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Letitia James challenged the validity of the bond roughly two weeks ago.

The challenge does not harm Trump’s bond but makes it so that the insurance company will need to show proof that they can pay it. 

Trump's lawyers responded last week.

Now she is preparing to argue before a judge that their response is inadequate.

The hearing will be on Monday.

[-] JeeBaiChow 1 points 1 month ago

Is he reauired to attend this one as well?

[-] FlowVoid 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

No, he is only required to attend criminal trials.

The appeal bond is part of a civil case, not criminal. And appeals are not trials, so attendance is not required.

[-] Orbituary 27 points 1 month ago

Stalling tactics to find more money?

[-] just_another_person 32 points 1 month ago

Well, I mean...they've committed fraud at this point by submitting a false bond to the court. I don't see how they could stall at all.

[-] FlowVoid 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

they've committed fraud at this point

Not quite. At this point Letitia James is arguing that the bond is no good, but a judge hasn't yet ruled on whether she is right.

If and when that happens, there will be less room to stall.

[-] danc4498 17 points 1 month ago

It worked! Should have been seizing property weeks ago. But they still haven’t.

[-] Orbituary 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, and now they're tied up in procedural red tape.

[-] homesweethomeMrL 3 points 1 month ago

Nah, just the usual incompetence and fraud.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

To hide more money, but yeah, stalling.

[-] Evilcoleslaw 17 points 1 month ago

It's court. A week or two is not a long time.

[-] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago

How does one get a 175 million fake bail bond? Like, the magnitude of scale alone is insane, but they tried to fake it?!

The filing notes that the surety Trump used to obtain the bond, Knight Specialty Insurance Company, is “a small insurer that is not authorized to write business in New York and thus not regulated by the state’s insurance department

I can see why they are concerned. Nearly 200 million is no joke. This would wreck a smaller company if 200 million was needed immediately. And Trump doesn't exactly owe this company his alliance.

Even though "Hank" the owner of the company, is a billionaire in CA from car loans and rental properties. Most of his assets are tied to properties that will not be easy to sell on the spot (Eviction usually takes at least a month), or on car loans that take time to accumulate in value.

On a non logical note: He isn't exactly the most trustworthy either....

In October 2015, Westlake Financial (Owned by Hank) was ordered by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to provide $44.1 million dollars in consumer relief for engaging in illegal debt collection practices. Westlake Financial and its affiliate Wilshire Consumer Credit deceived borrowers into thinking they were being called by repossession companies, other third parties, or even the borrowers’ own family and friends. The Bureau also found that the companies unlawfully disclosed information about borrowers’ debts to employers, family, and friends.

So lying to get what they want isn't off the table in this case either.

[-] Got_Bent 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I think the deal is that the parent company of the bond issuer is in the Cayman Islands, so the court would likely be unable to collect payment.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-bond-cayman-connection-stinks-084524447.html

[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

We have the best offshore holding companies! The best!

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

It's not the only factor. They're also additionally known to "overinsure" collateral, meaning they most likely don't have enough cash on hand to pay out the full sum (or if they do, it would hurt their ability to pay their other liabilities, creating the equivalent of a "bank run" risk)

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart 11 points 1 month ago

Why can’t they just take Trump’s word for it?

[-] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

"I know bonds, I have the best bonds. This is the best bond in the history of bonds, maybe of all time."

[-] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago

“Everyone’s saying it.”

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I'm a very stable genius!!!

this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2024
440 points (98.9% liked)

politics

17799 readers
3524 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!
  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 11 months ago
MODERATORS