510
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024
510 points (100.0% liked)
politics
18909 readers
3201 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.
- 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.
- 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
5 days ago I was downvoted for saying this would happen. Yet here we are.
Expect this judgement to get appealed and tossed completely. They can't do it all in one go as that's too obvious. Doing a slow roll. Randomly extending the deadline and slashing the bond amount is just the first step. Expect more. Each time easing up even more on Trump.
We're all just clinging on to the last sheds of hope in order to not fall into the endless pit of despair.
I don’t really have any faith in the court system anymore. Why should anyone? They control neither the purse nor the sword, and yet unqualified political stooges can dictate policy.
Imagine if we did the same for engineers or doctors. “Hey, my completely unqualified buddy gets to design a bridge, and if it falls down and kills people it is their fault!” It’s ridiculous.
There's no reason to toss the judgement and the appeals court is a NY State Court. Every single judge has been appointed by a Democratic Governor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Court_of_Appeals
There are no legal problems with the case against Trump, and his lying about property values is well documented. They are definitely not going to vacate the judgement.
Your doomer comment makes no sense. This dude is currently fucked. He has to pay $175 million in 10 days, and the rest when the appeals court boots the case. This is clearly bad for him. He should get it over with (if he can), stay out of court, and campaign for president. There's so many court cases coming that he will have to cancel his rallies, because of time and money constraints.
How many times have we heard this already? "They're not going to do the thing. If they do the thing, that's just a bridge too far even for them. Not even they will do the thing to protect Trump."
Courts: does the thing. Lawmakers: do the thing. GOP voters: do the thing. Trump: gets away with it.
Everyone else: Surprisedpicachu.jpg
Trump is facing 91 counts in four criminal trials:
A hush money case where Trump is in little legal peril, is based on shaky legal theory, and puts him at no political risk. And the DA has already caused two delays with their handling of their own evidence.
A RICO Case in Georgia, by far the most important criminal case in the country and easily the most important case in Fani Willis' career, and she throws the entire case into jeopardy because she cannot keep her personal and professional life separate. (I am not admonishing her for her personal life choices or actions, but when you have a case of this importance to both the nation and your personal career against this defendant, then you should be doing nothing to even give yourself a sniff of conflict of interest, impropriety, or ethics concerns.)
A stolen documents case in Florida being overseen by a judge who was appointed by Trump, has already repeatedly overstepped her authority to run interference for Trump, has deferred to Trump at every step of the case so far, and has openly stated her intentions to dismiss the case after jury selection has begun so double jeopardy attaches and the dismissal can't be appealed.
A Jan6 case in DC that is currently on indefinite hold while the Supreme Court (3 of which were appointed by Trump himself) decides to wait a couple of months before ruling on whether or not Trump is an absolute dictator that is above the law and I wish I were making that up.
Where's the accountability? And when (not if, when) the $464m award gets tossed out because fuck you thats why, will you continue to believe Trump will ever be held accountable for his actions? Because we have 8 years and counting of history to show that the answer to that question is "No", and those who are responsible for that accountability seem gleefully willing to bend over backwards to avoid giving it to him.
Until the day I see either Trump or Mar-A-Lago slapped behind a padlock, I will continue to refuse to believe he will ever be held to account.
8 years and counting? More like 77 and counting
He was supposed to have had to pay ~$500 million today, yet a judge appointed by a Democratic Governor gave him special treatment yet again.
Frankly, your unfounded optimism makes no sense.
He still has to pay the whole judgment. This is just the bond ahead of the appeal.
I believe the law was changed recently to prevent people from appealing and delaying the judgment. So a few years ago, he wouldn't have had to pay anything right now.
There's no way property would have been seized and sold by the end of today anyway. So getting $175 million in cash now and $280 million in property in a month is almost the same.
Not particularly, because reducing the appeals bond means that Trump can delay the trial even longer - which is the plan. Pretty much everyone sees that his plan from the beginning has been to push back and delay as long as possible, preferably until he's either confirmed as the Republican nominee (in which case he can beat the wardrum of "oh this is a political witch hunt, you can't sue a major political candidate") or, more preferably, he wins the election, in which case I'm sure the DOJ will move double-quick to find a way for him to not have to pay a cent to anyone.
This is a NY State Court. They don't answer to the DOJ.
They're not supposed to answer to the DOJ.
Seems that whenever Trump is involved, a lot of things that aren't supposed to happen keep happening.
He has to pay $175M in 10 days. For now. That could get extended. Or reduced. Or both. No reason to assume he'll be held to that now. All evidence points to it being reduced or extended again.
What evidence? The judges on the NY State Court of Appeals are all appointed by Democrats. More than that, he personally insults judges, making him not a sympathetic defendant to them.
They are tolerating him so that he has no avenues for appeal to the NY State Supreme Court. That's exactly what Judge Engoron did in this case. Stop being a doomer and take the win.
The fact that they already gave him an extension and a reduction once, just now. How can you be in this thread, yet not paying attention? They are literally at this moment giving him exactly the special treatment you claim there's "no evidence" for!
Are you not paying attention? I just said they are tolerating him so he has no legal avenues for the judgment to be reduced or appealed. Like it or not, this is what you have to do with clients who have lots of money for lawyers.
He's not getting away with anything. These judges are making sure he's 100% fucked. If you don't understand this principle, just say so. Have you ever followed a court case with a wealthy defendant?
you just plain do not understand what is happening. They are helping him to appeal, the bond amount is part of the appealing process, its collateral put away until the appeal is over and the judgment enforced. This was an appeals court.
Of course! If the judges reduce it now then Trump can't get it reduced later! Just keep reducing it down and there will be nothing for Trump to appeal, brilliant!
The fact that is was cut 60% just because Donald said he wasn't going to pay
This is literally the opposite... they are bending over backwards to give him a better chance to appeal
Where is the win?
The judgement was not reduced. The amount of the bond he has to post ahead of time is reduced, and it's still $175 million!
Better chance to appeal? He can appeal whether or not he posts the bond. Read about the case more.
I never said it was the judgement, I knew it was the bond but the point remains... Why does he get a break?
Also, he needs to post the bond to appeal, that's the whole issue here... They are giving him a 60% discount to make it easier for him to appeal.... Maybe take your own advice and read about the case more
How about this. The fact the appeals court didn't even give a reason for the decision. So can the next person that wants to appeal cite this? Not really because there's no reason to cite. The piss judges couldn't even be bothered to release their rationale.
No he doesn't.