That's bullshit. Just more laws that don't apply to this traitor.
Trump undervalued his properties to the IRS and overvalued them to investors. And now the courts are allowing him to undervalue them so he doesn't have to face the consequences of his fraud.
I remember, many years ago before the first time he ran, I read he and his buddy lawyer giuliany were neck deep in shit and Stormy also had a solid case. I was like "that's it. now he goes to jail." but lo and behold, here we are and he's free and running again.
Maybe it's true what people say: Flying is like falling and missing the ground. (I think it's based on something Douglas Adams wrote.)
Was that when he was referenced something like "Co-Conspirator #1 who went on to lead a successful campaign to become president of the United States"?
I remember that too and thinking "oh shit, he's fucked now!" But nope. Our political system is so broken that he really is above the law and consequences. Not sure why we went through with the whole American Revolution thing just to end up in a place where there are figurative kings held to a different standard than the rest of us peasants.
We really need a law that says when you tell the IRS what your property is worth they are allowed to buy it at that price; if they later find out you represented it at a higher value to others.
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FUCKING KIDDING ME
The legal system is doing EVERYTHING it can to delay literally everything for this man, just so that election time will creep closer and closer and they can just say, "oh it's too close to election time and we can't just cancel a Presidential candidate in the midst of all this".
These exceptions will never be given to any normal citizen of the US, but when it's this rich orange idiot, every rule in existence will bend.
May Trump and his VP pick both have fatal heart attacks late September/early October
Yep, trump is not the only person on trial here. You can't set a precedent that actually punishes financial fraud to the point where you can't actually profit from it when you're eventually caught.
Trump isn't the only real estate tycoon in NYC who has been fraudulently inflating the value of their assets. It would be uncomfortable for the judges to have to make a similar decision in the future to campaign donors.
I actually thought something like this was going to happen, since it has happened before, per another comment I read earlier.
Some corporations were told to post billions in appeals bonds, and in the end they were reduced to a fraction of it.
So, while disappointing, I wasn't completely surprised of this event.
I’m slightly less mad now that I know this has precedent. I’m still fucking furious that the only precedent I’ve heard about is corporations and Trump, since the law should be equally applied regardless of absolute amounts of money and I’m pretty sure that someone living in poverty isn’t going to get the same treatment for a $50k (or whatever is a proportional amount) judgement against them.
FUCKING SHIT. I SWEAR TO FUCK. CANT HE BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FUCKING EVER!?!? JUST THE CLASSIFIED FUCKING DOCUMENTS SITUATION SHOULD OF HAD HIS ASS IN JAIL LIKE DISCORD BRO. FUCK.
You had to have seen it coming.
What was going to happen, he fails to post bond like any other schmuck and goes to jail?
This sucks, but a few points are at least worth mentioning:
Of the five judges listed on the order, annoyingly slim as it is, three are Democrats and two are "nonpartisan" but with resumes in the public sector and public interest law.
Most states actually have a cap on appeal bonds, often around $50 million or less. NY doesn't have one, but all the same thinking, for good or for ill, that would lead to a statutory limit might influence the appeals court here. Among them is precluding additional litigation from forcing a fire sale.
In an appeal like this, the court has to at least conceptually imagine that there's some possibility of success, and that with a defendant who is leveraged AF and not nearly as liquid as he boasts, there is only one bite at the apple when seizing and selling the assets to satisfy the judgment. If the court is convinced that this amount, well into nine figures, will occupy the vast majority of his liquid assets and insure some plausible compensation for the plaintiff, and the other assets aren't going anywhere, then it's not insane to demand a bond more in line with the available liquidity.
Trump is definitely getting the "rich business owner with lots of lawyers" treatment here, and that's certainly something you could criticize about the American legal system, but I don't think we're seeing some completely inexplicable abuse of existing civil procedure. The orange turd still gets the due process that a President Turd would deny to so many others.
TL;DR: it's possible the only thing the Appeals Court is saying is that ol' Donny really can't get the bigger bond and that Trump Tower will still be there to seize later.
I heartily disagree on these limits being to prevent a fire sale. They're to protect the wealthy from a fire sale. You or I would be forced into a fire sale in a heartbeat for a million dollar judgement. And then into debtor's prison when we turn out to be normal people who don't have a million dollars of assets lying around.
And this is why I love Lemmy. Where else would you get a well reasoned explanation like this?
Oh, okay, cool, so the justice system cares if you say it's unfair and you can't afford the judgment now? Because I'm pretty sure that's news to most people.
If they started auctioning off and selling his properties to make money, it would turn over a lot of really dark stones full of other people's criminal activities.
He's being protected by the club he's in, not because they like him but because they would be in trouble if they didn't.
That's the basis of the system, mutually assurred corruption.
That's why Epstein Epsteined himself
And there goes every last shred of hope I had for America.
The country is fucking doomed, and it'll drag the rest of the world into chaos with it. We're all fucked.
We were fucked long before this clown showed up. If anything we should be grateful that he shine the light on it by being so obvious about it.
Time to start dragging billionaires into the streets.
Banks, mega corporations, (fake) rich people get bailed out — Republicans: Nothing.
Working-class doing public service get minor bailout with student loan forgiveness — Republicans: WHOA, NOW....
Do these judges have to explain their decision? Is there an opinion published somewhere? I'd love to understand what context brought them to this conclusion, I've never heard of someone gaining leniency because they couldn't afford the fine.
There's an old saying in Tennessee, I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, "don't do the crime if you can't do the time"...
The published order is just that. It doesn't explain the why or whatever just "We are reducing the bond amount and not removing the other limitations of the ruling"
Sigh. Evergreen:
I have lost all faith in our justice system.
“Justice system” is a misnomer. “Legal system” is more apt.
I have lost all faith in our ~~justice~~ system.
Rules for thee but not me me!!
Damn. I was really hoping this would be a ray of light for the next year and a reduction in the level of election insanity we're going to see.
Instead, just more fuel for the flames.
Violence would solve this problem.
It would, but it would also create lots of new problems. I would regain some hope for humanity, though, if the people finally woke up to the reality of their 350,000,000:1 ratio against their oppressors…
He should have been forced to sell all of his properties prior to his presidency.
People say he's being treated different, and he is. Special treatment in his favour.
Dianne T. Renwick, Anil C. Singh, Lizbeth González, Bahaati E. Pitt-Burke, and Kelly O’Neill Levy
What was their actual individual motivation?
Does anyone else have a feeling he won’t be able to come up with this amount either?
It's a lot easier to get a few $50M bonds than to get five $100M bonds (I read some post that said these big bond places have firm limits at $100M). It also gives him 10 more days to tout how he is about to make $3B on his Truth Social sale (to a shell company who overinflated the price) and will totally be good for the bond. I think he can do it just to avoid them digging into his finances.
It's complete bullshit. Normal people are not given this kind of leniency.
How funny would it be if he can't raise the $175 million either.
He's already recently stated he has the full half billion in cash on hand, just refuses to pay in cash, and bonds companies won't touch him.
They didn't give him a break because he can't pay, they gave him a break because he refuses to.
He's also a well known liar. There's no reason to believe he has the full amount in cash
In a situation like this, he should be held to his word.
He's the one that's said he has the funds available; so why should he get a break?
It'd be different if that figure was pulled from thin air; but it was based off of his own valuations.
Un fucking believable.
burn this country down
So we can all just do whatever we want without consequences right? Or is it still just rich fascists the rules don’t apply to?
What a great country you guys have...
Every other country in the world reading that comment.
The one universal truth is that the same rules do not apply to the rich and powerful, no matter where you live.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.