Upon exactly what is his judgment based? What laws were broken, who made a complaint based on anything, ad nauseam?
Truckers have started a boycott of New York in response. A state that just lost Remington firearms as a major manufacturer cannot afford that.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
From Hilton Suites Boca Raton--
I presume, Mr Helfner, you are addressing the Decision handed down by Judge Engoron in the matter of State of New York v. Donald J. Trump. et al.
The matter will surely be appealed by the Defendants, so the $$$ amount of the award will likely be modified. However, the Defendants must post a bond equal to the Judgement of $380M. Trump simply will have to sell some properties.
Furthermore, this Judgement, whatever the final amount will be after the appeal process is completed, will not go away at such time he becomes POTUS47, such as will the various criminal charges.
quote:Trump’s notice of appeal doesn’t stop New York Attorney General Letitia James from seeking to enforce the judgment and its penalties. Trump is expected to ask a higher court to suspend enforcement of Engoron’s ruling while he pursues his appeal. Without a stay, he will have to post a bond worth upward of around half a billion dollars to prevent James from moving to collect.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Looks like Trump "can't come up with the loot":
New York Times:
quote:Donald J. Trump’s lawyers disclosed on Monday that he had failed to secure a roughly half-billion dollar bond in his civil fraud case in New York, arguing that doing so was “a practical impossibility.”
The filing, coming one week before the bond is due, raised the prospect that the former president might face a financial crisis unless an appeals court comes to his rescue. Mr. Trump has asked the appeals court to pause the $454 million judgment that a New York judge imposed on Mr. Trump last month, or accept a bond of only $100 million.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
We have had almost 8 years of "get Trump". Isn't it way past time to let this obsession go and put the effort into doing something useful?
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mr. Harris, I think it is time to accept that there are voters, such as my educators, social services, and performing artist friends who hold that Trump is simply unfit to be President and must be stopped by whatever lawful means there are at hand.
To divert his campaign funds towards legal fees and the equity in his real estate holdings to satisfy his required surety bond in pending civil actions are all means to that end.
For myself, I'm part of "that 70%" of voters who wished that the two major parties "came up with someone else". What if the Republicans came up with Nikki and the Democrats with Gretchen? Wouldn't that finally put the USA on a par with almost every other democratic sovereign state of size who has, or has had, a woman as their head of state?
Now today is Illinois primary day. Of course, I'm off to the Park District's building (the School District kicked Elections out a few years ago account security) as there is an important referendum issue to be addressed. But when it comes to the ballot line for POTUS, my vote may just be a write in for PRESENT.
Posted by George Harris (Member # 2077) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Mr. Harris, I think it is time to accept that there are voters, such as my educators, social services, and performing artist friends who hold that Trump is simply unfit to be President and must be stopped by whatever lawful means there are at hand.
To divert his campaign funds towards legal fees and the equity in his real estate holdings to satisfy his required surety bond in pending civil actions are all means to that end.
What all this really says is that these people are so obsessed with their TDS is that if they cannot beat the guy by fair means they will try to beat him by foul means. I have seen this played out in some other countries where the party in power fends off opposition by going after their candidates with various and sundry legal actions, many of which could be considered to be of dubious validity. This is what I see being done to Trump. If his positions are so bad, then go after him with proper campaigning, and stop the legal harassment.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Now today is Illinois primary day. Of course, I'm off to the Park District's building (the School District kicked Elections out a few years ago account security) as there is an important referendum issue to be addressed.
The measure easily carried:
quote:CLARENDON HILLS, IL – A big majority of Clarendon Hills voters on Tuesday favored an $8 million referendum for upgrading Lions Park Pool, according to unofficial results.
Seventy percent of voters supported the Clarendon Hills Park District measure, with 30 percent against it. About 1,850 votes were counted. The measure won in all eight of the district's precincts.
For the owner of a $500,000 house, the tax hike would mean a $203 annual increase for 15 years, according to the district.
My house is "almost but not quite" at that level. $3045 more in taxes (if that) to have another $10K added to my house's value; sounds like a fair deal to me.
I've always held "good schools bring good people which bring good home prices". The pool (which I've never been near) is simply an extension of that line of thought.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
quote:Originally posted by George Harris:
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Mr. Harris, I think it is time to accept that there are voters, such as my educators, social services, and performing artist friends who hold that Trump is simply unfit to be President and must be stopped by whatever lawful means there are at hand.
To divert his campaign funds towards legal fees and the equity in his real estate holdings to satisfy his required surety bond in pending civil actions are all means to that end.
What all this really says is that these people are so obsessed with their TDS is that if they cannot beat the guy by fair means they will try to beat him by foul means. I have seen this played out in some other countries where the party in power fends off opposition by going after their candidates with various and sundry legal actions, many of which could be considered to be of dubious validity. This is what I see being done to Trump. If his positions are so bad, then go after him with proper campaigning, and stop the legal harassment.
That is presuming that the harassment is legal. So far, what I see is summary judgments with no legal basis whatsoever, violations of several Constitutional amendments constituting the Bill of Rights (particularly the Eighth Amendment in this case), no recusals of judges or district attorneys with open biases (never mind other character flaws), ad nauseam. Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Messrs. Harris and Helfner, you may find this Journal Editorial supports your positions:
Fair Use:
quote:New York Attorney General Letitia James’s use of lawfare to take down Donald Trump is getting uglier by the day. She is now threatening to seize the former President’s assets after effectively denying him the ability to appeal the grossly inflated civil-fraud judgment against him.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Well, it appears "Trump won one" in having the surety bond in the civil real estate valuation matter reduced from the judgement amount of $557M to $175M - an amount more likely closer to the settlement after appeal.
But he wasn't so lucky regarding the criminal matter of falsifying records of a company, even if privately held, still has debt held by the public and is subject to independent audit. That trial, which if convicted, can include a penalty of imprisonment, will start April 15.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
What falsification of records? Engoron should stop setting himself up as some kind of expert. There are no defendants claiming any such thing.
And JFTR, let me post the text of the Eighth Amendment:
quote:Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Officers of the law are charged by oath with upholding that supreme law of the USA, in all cases.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
Mr. Helfner, you have a point that the surety bond in the civil matter ruled upon in the Decision handed down by Judge Engoron appeared excessive, even if the Eighth Amendment applies to criminal matters as distinct from civil.
However, I will acknowledge that the "excessive bail" notion should equally apply to civil judgements as well - apparently the Appeals Court from which the Defendants sought relief, agreed resulting in the reduced surety bond.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
At this time, it appears more likely than not that Trump will return to the White House as POTUS47. At such time, any pending criminal cases will cease to exist. Should there be a conviction at that time, such will be quickly pardoned.
However, as this Times Opinion piece points out, such will not not be the case with any civil matters pending or adjudicated. Mr. Trump and/or his business entities will be liable for any judgments upheld on appeal.
Posted by irishchieftain (Member # 1473) on :
I see the Times has not let go of nonsequitur phrases such as saying “hush money” for legal non-disclosure agreements (the actual phrase would imply an illegal bribe instead). Doing that ruins credibility in an instant. There is also the matter of biased juries, which needs to be investigated very thoroughly.
Posted by Gilbert B Norman (Member # 1541) on :
It certainly doesn't appear as if this trial is "exactly a fun experience" for Mr. Trump:
quote:Former President Donald Trump spends four days a week cold and without Diet Coke as a defendant in a drab Manhattan courtroom
Looks like the WSJ hasn’t changed either. Most likely got worse since Murdoch ownership, which FTR was way after their “there shall be open borders” editorial.