FTA:
"Thus NY AG James looks to be soon greenlit to execute on her $450 million judgment against Trump as if Trump posted no bond."
That was my #1 question in all of this, assuming a bond failure, does she get to go after $175 million in assets or $450 million?
Now we know...
Edit: This article is garbage. Letitia James hasn't announced shit, this is reporting what some guys on Twitter are talking about. I wouldn't hold my breath until a better source reports about it.
The State of New York gets to collect on the entire judgement. That is the amount that the trial court found him liable for and that's the amount he must pay.
The bond amount being lowered only means that he needs to post that amount as a guarantee against the judgement in order to stop execution before he appeals. If he loses his appeal, he still needs to pay the full amount of the judgement. Since the bond was no good, it is the same as if he didn't post anything.
Newsweek articles are often garbage.
This should be the top comment. I'm so goddamn tired of articles based on tweets
Yup it's all speculation and discussion of what people are saying. Like the Trumpism "Many people are saying".
Tried to comment on that but just get downvoted because people see the (wrong) headline and think it's the truth.
I often go to threads about Newsweek articles to see the discussion, but I never click the articles anymore. They're a total rag, and seem to have figured out that people on both sides will click an article saying Trump is going to get something that's coming to him.
LoL, no surety, no bond, and now #45 has hooked another criminal (Hankey) into his operation. Go for it, pull them all down.
Is he finally draining the swamp?
They're all clinging to each other trying not to fall off a cliff of their own making... Loving it.
yet another post where the title says "Trump To Actually Be Held Responsible For Crimes Committed On Live TV" and the article is just people who ahve nothing to do with either Trump or the law guessing that someone could possibly do something with no idea as to whether anyone will actually do anything. It's raw speculation and it degrades the platform, but anything that says "Trump Good" or "Trump Bad" will of course get a million upvotes.
Feels like I'm back on fucking Reddit.
I don't blame the community, I blame the media. The media needs to generate views to sell eyeballs. They need to keep you clicking and watching by saying that the resolution is just around the corner. If they waited to report on things that actually happened nobody would care.
Feels like I’m back on fucking Reddit.
DISCLAIMER: This is a complete tangent from comments on the original post, but the original post is likely garbage anyway so I'll just go with it.
I don't know why people think that creating a copy-cat version of Reddit with "federation" will do much of anything to solve the problems with online "communities".
The problem with Reddit may have been partially the for-profit corporate part, or the admins, etc but it was definitely not exclusively those things.
Every single online "community" that has popped up since Web 2.0 has versions of the exact same problems. Maybe they're difficult to solve inherently, but I am not sure because it seems like everyone just creates the same site structure and I think at least some of it has to do with the structure.
Is there anyone trying to not make the next Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, or Reddit? Someone that's trying to actually make something different? Like something useful or with a fundamentally better moderation model? Because if so maybe I should waste my time on that instead of these copycat platforms.
It's not just "they're bots" or "they're Russians" either...because Nextdoor has a pretty stringent verification policy, is based around localities, and it's still essentially Facebook for NIMBYs.
Welcome to the new Newsweek. It's shit so consistently, I no longer click.
To be honest, I find myself reading them more. Their goals are to drive clicks more than political ideals. It's garbage, but consistent garbage with minimal bias compared to most other options. At least you know where they stand...
That article was quite the incoherent circlejerk
Trump posted a $175 million bond on April 1 in order to prevent the seizure
April Fools!
Looks like there is a real possibility that
The headline would have been a lot more honest if it had included that part
IIRC the judge is giving shithead another 10 days to re-secure the $175M bond so James is no doubt warming up the seizure engines
How many times has he gotten an extra 10 days for no valid reason now, is it 2 or 3?
Seizing properties? Yeah, right. I’ll believe it once it’s already happened.
Surely Hankey isn't offering up $175 million on Trump's behalf out of the goodness of his own heart. This is surely an investment where he can gain privileged access to the Trump administration if he gets into office again, maybe get some lucrative government contracts out of it.
Shit, he offered to put in 475, but while on the call to set it up, trumps lawyers found out they got it lowered to 175, and told Hankey he was no longer needed.
Then had to go back for the 175 because no one legit would even know that.
It's very possible trumps lawyers knew a bond wouldn't work, but knew by the time that was found out, Hankey was on the hook.
It's a lot easier for trump to avoid paying Hankey than the government.
I love this for both of them.
Everything Trump touches, dies.
Wtf is that user submitted fairness meter at the bottom? Since when do we rely on trolls to provide any reliable metrics about quality of writing?
Since it was deemed profitable to do so. Every vote is an ad impression and trying to manipulate or correct the value just means even more ad impressions.
Look at the site on mobile with no filters and it's immediately obvious that they are in the enshitification business, not news.
Just say that every article has a far-right bias so that they eventually over-correct in the other direction.
Not to mention the going along with the "centrist equals fair" bullshit that media outlet owners and other rich people love to perpetuate🤦
So this article speculating a lot and discussing a couple of people who were speculating and discussing on Xitter? Wow this is worthless...
She was going to seize propert if no bond.
This bond came in at the last second.
A bunch of issues were found with the bond.
A court ruled it's not valid.
For some reason that means they have to pay the bond in cash, and trump has to cover the rest of the original?
A court ruled it's not valid.
Has this happened yet? all I've seen so far is the court asked the insurance co for more information, but no outright ruling on the validity.
A New York court has rejected Knight Specialty's paperwork and said it wanted to see more information on its financial backing. The company filed new paperwork on April 4.
It's my understanding that new paperwork didn't help anything.
Like, one of the issues was they weren't even licensed in NY, I don't know how paperwork could retroactively make it legal.
But while they can't promise to pay it under bond, they did sign something saying they were good for 175 million. And they don't have it.
So trump failed to post bond, and now they can seize property.
I think
Shits confusing and trump just says anything to delay this stuff. But I think if Knight doesn't cut a check for cash, they seize property up to what they couldn't out of the 175 million. Or maybe somehow the whole amount because he couldn't get the bond.
What's confusing is these articles are written to sound like these things have happened when really it's just a quote from some rando who says these things are likely to happen. The court itself has not ruled on or rejected the paperwork yet. If you can find an article after 4/4/24 that says otherwise I'd love to see it.
I hate Trump and I hope he gets all that's coming to him, but I don't think this is accurate.
In order for Trump to delay payment of the fines he was court ordered to pay he needs to appeal the courts decision. Under the local law that means he doesn't have to pay till the new case is received or rejected and when received is done, but he does have to post a bond to make sure he doesn't just appeal to get a delay and to ensure at least some of the fines are paid. At first the bond was set to the entire amount, this was challenged by Trump and adjusted to be only a part by the court.
Then Trump attempted to post the bond from Knight, but there was a technical issue with the posting. Some documents were missing including a financial statement. This has lead to speculation it may be that these documents show the bond won't hold up and thus would get rejected. It may however just be an error and get corrected right away. There is the opportunity to repost it and correct the errors, so we will see what happens.
The article goes on into discussion and speculation by a couple of lawyers on Xitter that if the bond doesn't hold up, Trump would have to pay the full amount. And this would probably mean some of his property would get seized. However none of this has happened yet and is thus total speculation. The lawyers also go into a lot of speculation about the bond and the insurer.
Let's just wait and see what the court says. Instead of this grabbing popcorn and yelling grab his shit before we're good and well ready. I've heard Trump getting what's coming to him so many times now and it never seems to happen, so I don't want to get my hopes up.
"News"week is a fucking trainwreck these days. Pointless to look at them any more.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Eric Lisann was reacting to a separate comment by another lawyer, Dave Kingman, who wrote that Knight Specialty Insurance will not be able to post the bond for Trump.
Writing on X, formerly Twitter, one-time federal prosecutor Lisann wrote that Knight Speciality might not be able to post the bond for Trump and will be liable for the full amount because it had given a guarantee to the court.
"Looks like there is a real possibility that this Don Hankey-owned Knight Specialty Insurance does not itself have liquidity, and did not get from Trump collateral, sufficient to provide legally cognizable assurance that it can pay $175 million on demand in the event of a judgment-affirming appeal," he said.
Trump posted a $175 million bond on April 1 in order to prevent the seizure of his assets by New York while he attempts to appeal the civil fraud ruling against him.
The bond was then rejected by the court's filing system shortly after it was posted due to missing paperwork, including a "current financial statement."
James, whose office led the fraud case against Trump, later raised questions about the "sufficiency" of the bond and noted that the surety backing it, Knight Specialty Insurance Company (KSIC), is not admitted in New York, meaning it's ineligible to obtain a certificate of qualification from the Department of Financial Services.
The original article contains 712 words, the summary contains 225 words. Saved 68%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
this headline is just false.
Fuck this russian asset traitor POS.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
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