Trump Gets Triggered By Looming Criminal Charges & Melts Down

Not lookin' good for D.J.

Former President Donald Trump faces a Monday deadline to accomplish the impossible.
If Trump and his adult sons are unable to pay or secure a bond for the $464 million judgment in his civil fraud case -- which their lawyers have called a "practical impossibility" -- New York Attorney General Letitia James could begin the process of seizing the former president's prized assets.

https://news.yahoo.com/deadline-arrives-trump-secure-454m-130016566.html

Trump $owes 100%.
If Letitia liquidates 3 Trump assets and only obtains 80%, can she continue to liquidate until she reaches 100%?

And if Trump doesn't want Letitia to pick which assets to be liquidated, Trump can beat her to it? As long Trump reaches 100% before Letitia gets her hands on it?
 
Liquidating assets takes time - time to find a buyer, time to reach terms, time to sort out the relevant purchase and sale documents, and then time to transfer the funds. And of course the buyer has to come up with the cash which may take time for them to raise the cash (even selling stocks doesn't result in an instant infusion of cash).

And, of course, if it's rushed we're talking about fire sale prices (probably significantly lower that the values that Trump used for tax purposes).
 
Shiftless2 said:
Liquidating assets takes time - time to find a buyer, time to reach terms, time to sort out the relevant purchase and sale documents, and then time to transfer the funds. And of course the buyer has to come up with the cash which may take time for them to raise the cash (even selling stocks doesn't result in an instant infusion of cash).
And, of course, if it's rushed we're talking about fire sale prices (probably significantly lower that the values that Trump used for tax purposes). #402
Click to expand...
I hadn't thought of you as a sunny cockeyed optimist
until now.
LL !
Letitia! Liquidate!

and if there's a little left over go out & buy a McD's Happy Meal. Or a McD's.
 

Live updates: Hearing on new evidence in Trump N.Y. hush money case​

Story by Washington Post staff

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is holding a hearing at 10 a.m. about a late release of more than 100,000 pages of potential evidence in former president Donald Trump’s trial over 2016 hush money payments. A key question is whether he’ll set a new trial date, after delaying jury selection until at least mid-April.

Trump’s lawyers argue the last-minute nature of the documents from an old federal investigation into Trump’s former fixer, Michael Cohen, is such an egregious violation that the charges should be dropped and the district attorney’s office sanctioned.

Prosecutors say that’s nonsensical, and the new material is not key to ....

CONTINUED
 
Shiftless2 said:
"the charges should be dropped and ..." #404
Click to expand...
Nuh uhh.

#405
The leap from $464 $M to $175 $M undermines both the government, and the judicial system that designated it.
And the more than $50% reduction compounds that appearance.

If stability in our judicial system were immaterial stare decisis ("to stand by things decided") wouldn't be so important.

I'm not asserting the $464 $M value was correct to the penny. But whatever the figure, it should have been given enough thought in context of the similar cases before it, to resist such last minute revisions of $hundreds of $millions of $dollars.

Looks bad.
 
#405
The leap from $464 $M to $175 $M undermines both the government, and the judicial system that designated it.
And the more than $50% reduction compounds that appearance.
Click to expand...

Just more proof that the US has a two tiered justice system - one for the rich and powerful like Trump and one for the rest of us.
 
Shiftless2 said:
"Just more proof that the US has a two tiered justice system - one for the rich and powerful like Trump and one for the rest of us." S2 #407
Click to expand...
Is there evidence this reduction resulted from untoward Trump influence?

I was troubled by the size of the initial fine.
I'm now troubled by the sudden drastic reduction.
And I'm not comfortable with the timing of the reduction. Bad seems to fog Trump the way dust clouded Chaz Shultz' Pig-Pen.
 
It's my understanding that it's not a reduction in the fine but in the collateral he's going to have to post if he appeals.

But it was my understanding that the law specifically requires that he post the full value of the fine - obviously I'm wrong or the judge decided to waive the law?
 
The long version:
Shiftless2 said:
"It's my understanding that it's not a reduction in the fine but in the collateral he's going to have to post if he appeals.
But it was my understanding that the law specifically requires that he post the full value of the fine - obviously I'm wrong or the judge decided to waive the law?" #409
Click to expand...
The short version:
it's a mess.

- and -

I have wondered:
seems likely to me some segment of the U.S. electorate is so jaded, so disenchanted with U.S. politics, that they've lulled themselves into believing it doesn't matter. Thus
the churn, they vote for the candidate that seems most likely to generate "interesting" headlines.

Just what % of the voting population applies this standard in the voting booth? Some substantial % of the determinative "swing" vote, apparently.
 
Shiftless2 said:
"And just in case someone still thinks the law is being applied equally - that article is far longer than a single pic" #413
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if I'm making proper sense of it.

Seems to me if Trump or his minions resort to such tactic, it's yet one more dangerous escalation in ultra-partisan politics that has attended the hijacking of the Republican party.
All Trump would need is plausible deniability, or in Trump's case, deniability plausible or not.

UBL skyjacked passenger airliners to use them as guided missiles aimed to do maximum damage, claim maximum death-toll. Success! ~3,000 innocent dead.
Now Trump has hijacked the Republican party, and threatens to dissolve Constitutional law, and become a dictator. Right?

“We fell in love.” President Trump commenting on his relationship w/NK/KJU

The short version:
There's risk of appearance of impropriety if this here to fore pie-tossing melee between the exec. & legislature, should draw in the judicial (a 3 ring circus & sadly, then involving all 3 branches of U.S. federal government). A Trump "trifecta"?

Problem: intervene ham-handedly, and our last best hope of non-violent self-rescue from the judicial branch vanishes.

Therefore: what it will take to stop this is a Trump appointed law judge to put a stop to this with a nationwide precedent?
Or ... ? "To his majesty, lord Trump"?

* ultra-partisanship: when partisanship trumps citizenship, or humanity, as in the case of Ukraine or the U.S. Southern border
 
Sounds like they're getting desperate (aka, anything to delay the trial)

Trump appeals ruling that let Fani Willis stay on election interference case​


STORY


 
Shiftless2 said:
"Sounds like they're getting desperate (aka, anything to delay the trial)" #415
Click to expand...
This is Trump's M.O.
Trump has plenty of practice, potentially more practice than Fani has.

Many a laymen would prefer a speedy resolution, simply because they don't want penalty consequence pending against them.
Trump's decades long history demonstrates the opposite, Trump would prefer to delay than to confront / resolve. In Trump's own words:
"I like conflict." Trump early March 2018
Click to expand...
 

Republican-appointed judges raise alarm over Trump attacks on law​

Story by Spencer Hsu

A Republican-appointed judge denounced Donald Trump’s social media attacks against the judge presiding over the former president’s hush money trial in Manhattan and his daughter, calling them assaults on the rule of law that could lead to violence and tyranny.

“When judges are threatened, and particularly when their family is threatened, it’s something that’s wrong and should not happen,” U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins in a live interview Thursday. He added, “It is very troubling because ...

SOURCE
 

Trump Running His Mouth About Judge Merchan’s Daughter Isn’t the First Time Judges Have Come Under Threat​

The Republicans plowing forth in spite of the disastrousness of their position is enough to remind a guy of the spring of 2005.

www.esquire.com

Trump Running His Mouth About Judge Merchan’s Daughter Isn’t the First Time Judges Have Come Under Threat

The Republicans plowing forth in spite of the disastrousness of their position is enough to remind a guy of the spring of 2005.
www.esquire.com www.esquire.com

You may have to erase any cookies you have relating to esquire.com
 
"There were episodes of very dark hilarity: The Republicans in the House of Representatives issued a subpoena to have Terri Schiavo come to Washington and testify, even though she had been in a vegetative state for months. Congress even passed a bill specifically tailored to keep Schiavo on life support. President George W. Bush flew back from vacation, a Black Swan event in and of itself, to sign a bill. And there were threats, both anonymous ones and some dealt out by career politicians in Washington, against the judges who were trying to sort out one of the most volatile end-of-life cases in history."

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a60357466/trump-judge-merchan-daughter/
Click to expand...
If this was some kind of complicated sick-minded satire I wouldn't approve it, but might at least understand.

If not, this isn't levity, it's lunacy. Why are these idiots so squeamish about law enforcement?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top