671
Has Alex Jones paid out a penny yet?
Will Rudy?
These guys seem to be able to ignore these judgements with impunity.
I am shocked that his attorney acknowledged wrongdoing. That'll fuck any appeal attempts.
this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
671 points (98.7% liked)
politics
19181 readers
6060 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Rudy probably can't pay that anyway, he's been in a bad way financially for a while now.
Rudy took a private plane to turn himself in in Georgia this summer. An article I read mentioned he has an apartment in Manhattan listed on the market for $6.1M. Now, I doubt he's got $148M, but he's not dead fucking broke like he's trying to claim. At least not yet.
No you misunderstand, his nonprofit foundation was selling his manhattan apartment for 6.1m. He controls the foundation but that money can't be taken away.
I haven't actually looked it up to see if he even owned the apartment he lived in, but there are many ways to shelter controlled assets in ways that minimize liability and tax burdens on the person who controls them. These mechanisms are a big part of the reason why rich people don't pay taxes. Instead they donate their earnings or claim losses on stock transactions.
If you donate a million dollars of your assets to your foundation while simultaneously earning a million dollars in cash from business dealings- how much tax do you pay? $0. Million in pocket, million dollar asset sheltered and still in your control. Your foundation control can be passed from generation to generation...
Keep in mind his foundation can "employ" him and provide lodgings to him and other reasonable expenses (e.g. food, travel, lodging... you know... the things we all toil away to earn money and pay 30%+ taxes for.)
I hear about bad faith charities and foundations all of the time. It’s insane that this is just accepted and unchallenged.
Lawmakers aren't going to close that loophole because they all do it themselves.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Drain the swamp, man! Drain the Swamp Man!
You would have to wonder if he was a just a regular Joe blow fellow if he would be in jail in till he could pay?
Debtors prisons are not something society should go back to. IIRC, this is a civil case, so, no jail. He should be in jail, but that isn't in the cards until he's convicted criminally.
If the money you owe is child support, debtors prisons are a thing right now. Also, during the hearing where the judge decides to put you in jail, you've no right to an attorney.
Of course this is more expensive than just giving benefits to single mothers, and children gain no advantage by having fathers in jail, but cruelty is the point.
No. Genuinely poor people are what the legal world refers to as judgment proof. Best you can do is garnish wages, which I doubt Rudy has any. You can also put a lien on property, but if they don't have any, you get nothing.
Alex filed for bankruptcy, so he hasn't paid anything yet. The families recently said they'd settle for 6% but I haven't seen anything since.
He filed for bankruptcy but last I heard the bankruptcy court found his judgement in the Sandy Hook case couldn't be discharged through bankruptcy. So he still owes. It'll just be a long drawn out affair to chase down his hidden assets.
No Jones declared bankruptcy and Infowars is on the chopping block to get liquidated, after that they'll go back to court to seek liquidation of his personal assets, homes, cars, watches Etc.
load more comments
(4 replies)
He'll have to squeeze a whole lot of crude oil from his head to cover that.
I forgot about that whole Zorg moment he had on the podium
That was during the four seasons landscaping press conference. LOL
load more comments
(3 replies)
Nine figures, baby. Suck it, Ghoul.
I'm sure #45 will gladly cover it for him, NOT. LoL
He doesn't like losers checks 45s court cases in recent years lol. For a guy that doesn't like losing, he's not President, least for now. I truly hope people come out to vote again like last time. Not my country but it'd be nice to have stability for democracy from the country with the strongest military.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"After the verdict, Giuliani said he didn't testify because he was worried the judge would find him in contempt, and complained that he hadn't been allowed to enter evidence that his allegations were true, despite his not having turned over any such evidence before trial"
Just wow. Guess there's a difference between what you're willing to tell a reporter on the street and what you're willing to tell the judge in court?
If I'm reading this correctly, Rudy had "evidence" but the court had ruled it inadmissible.
I mean, I have a document right now that says Rudy Giuliani is the zodiac killer. Signed by Jesus and everything.
Don't mean it will hold up in court where there are procedures.
It's the same in Trump's trial. He was barred from using his "buyer beware" clause as an argument because it doesn't hold legal water.
Someone should keep a running total of how much they all collectively will never pay.
load more comments
(1 replies)
He acknowledged in his closing argument that “my client has committed wrongful conduct against” the pair and had “harmed” them, but asked the jury to keep in mind the good Giuliani had done in his lifetime.
He told them the message he believed they should send is, “You should have been better, but you’re not as bad as the plaintiffs are making you out to be.”
This has to be the worst closing argument ever. This might work if say, a teacher commits a drink driving offense, or a crosswalk attendant steals some laundry detergent, but "think of all the good" that this sycophant did in his life is just going to inspire heavier penalties.
But look at it from the defense's perspective. He's guilty AF and there's no denying it. What play could that make other than to try a humanitarian appeal? It's pretty clearly not going to work, but as his defense council they have to try.
I hope they get to seize his houses and they move in right away.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It was the only argument Rudy could make. He refused to provide discovery as part of an overall litigation strategy to hide his assets and got sanctioned with an adverse finding on liability. The only thing to argue to the jury was the amount of damages.
Can somebody familiar with the US legal system explain how these massive damage verdicts work?
- Are they proportional to the publicity of the offence, the wealth of the parties? I'm happy it happens to Giulani but it doesn't make much sense to me... It seems hugely excessive for this kind of offence
- Does anybody actually expect anyone to pay that amount?
From the reporting I read, the huge cost is driven by the need for a ‘counter-messaging’ campaign to debunk the existing, repeated libel committed by Rudy. Given how his words were broadcast wide and often, the claimants will have to basically keep a PR team employed for several years until her name is restored or forgotten - which is very expensive.
There’s absolutely the usual pain and undue suffering award as well, but that’s not what ballooned this judgment
load more comments
(1 replies)
Juries have a LOT of discretion regarding damages in civil cases. The damages are what the 12 jurors say it is.
The actual damages is how much money would it reasonably take to undo the damage done to the wronged party.
Pain and Suffering is compensation for the distress the damage caused
Punitive damages are a way for the jury to punish the accused for the moral repugnancy of what they did
load more comments
(1 replies)
for defaming two Georgia election workers
Ladies and gentlemen, "America's Mayor"
What is the impact of this? It seems like whenever a political person is hit with a huge fine in the US, they never pay a penny of it. And furthermore, it seems like they just live their life in luxury, untouched by the massive amount of money they owe.
I just don't understand. In other countries, I'd expect the criminal behind bars - especially if they won't pay. What kafkaesque bureaucratic shithole set of laws allow this?
That would be an interesting metric. "Republican deficit" - the sum of money owed by individual Republican agents (politicians and ex-politicians) through civil suits. Compare it to the "Democratic deficit" and see what kind of numbers we're talking.
It's civil and against him personally, he'll be paying it or they'll be back in court seeking additional damages. Criminal law is different and yes oftentimes the government will accept a small percentage of what's actually owed usually 20%-ish.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Donny will surely cover this expense, right?
¯\(ツ)/¯
Glad to see it. I'm curious as to what that means practically. Does the court have the ability to force him to pay or can he just drag his feet indefinitely?
He'll probably appeal it, and he doesn't have the money anyway. Might move to Florida to protect his pension from being garnished.
He still does apparently at least have millions in assets though. And that sweet pension.
Might move to Florida to protect his pension
Maybe he can be roommates with O.J.
Ultimately the courts can force him to pay some of it if he has any real property or other assets or income. But that will likely require more work on the part of the plaintiffs here to collect. It'll probably only be a fraction of what is owed, and then part of that is attorneys fees.
👏
Suck on that, you bitchass trick!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
WASHINGTON — Rudy Giuliani should pay a pair of Georgia election workers he repeatedly and falsely accused of fraud $148 million in damages, a federal jury said Friday.
The eight-person jury awarded Ruby Freeman and her daughter, Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, the sum after a four-day trial, during which they testified that Giuliani’s lies in support of former President Donald Trump’s bogus stolen-election claims subjected them to a torrent of racist and violent threats and turned their lives upside down.
Their attorney, Michael Gottlieb, said in his closing argument that Giuliani had “no right to offer up defenseless civil servants up to a virtual mob in order to overturn an election.” He urged the jurors to “send a message” with their verdict.
In his opening statement, Giuliani attorney Joseph Sibley said a large verdict would be the “civil equivalent of the death penalty” for his client.
He acknowledged in his closing argument that “my client has committed wrongful conduct against” the pair and had “harmed” them, but asked the jury to keep in mind the good Giuliani had done in his lifetime.
U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in August found Giuliani liable for defaming the pair after the defendant repeatedly snubbed court orders to turn over required evidence to Freeman and Moss.
The original article contains 510 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 59%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›