New York Judge Arthur Engoron agreed to accept Trump's $175 million bond, provided that the insurer has the cash
    • lobut@lemmy.ca
      20·
      7 months ago

      I’ve been watching a lot of SovCit videos (I’m not sure why). I’m actually surprised at how much the court puts up with.

      • hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world
        10·
        7 months ago

        It’s always important to remember that “putting up with stuff” for judges is mostly them making their case appeal prove. Because the judge accepts the bond, now they can’t really bring it up on appeal. That’s the whole reason.

        The judge is only more lenient because he wants to pin Trump down and leave him without good arguments on appeal, which is what we want - nothing would be worse than to see everything get overturned.

            • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world
              1·
              7 months ago

              abbreviation? what? Nothing is being abbreviated anywhere.

              you wrote “appeal prove”. That doesn’t make any sense. “Prove” is the wrong word. The correct word is “proof”.

              Specifically, prove is a verb. A doing word. You prove things. Like walk, or run. But things cannot have or be “prove”. I walk down the road. I prove my case.

              Proof is either a noun or an adjective, depending on which word of it you use. In this instance, proof means resistant. Like waterproof speakers.

              edit: and to add, I hyphenated appeal-proof because appealproof isn’t a word. Perhaps you confused hyphenation with abbreviation somehow?

      • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        4·
        7 months ago

        You’re not kidding, they get so many chances even when security needs to be called. Part of me is cynical though. It’s always white guys in white courts, at least from what I’ve seen. I wonder how a black guy in a white court in one of those redneck states would be treated.

    • bowroat@infosec.pubEnglish
      191·
      7 months ago

      judge: and now you have the money?

      defendant: yes, this time it’s real

      judge: for really reals?

      defendant: for really reals

      ))<>((

    • distantsounds@lemmy.worldEnglish
      16145·
      7 months ago

      It’s always been, but how much is it to buy a president who doesn’t support genocide? Are any of those available?

        • distantsounds@lemmy.worldEnglish
          864·
          7 months ago

          No, Biden is the president right NOW. The election is over half a year away. This has nothing if to do with Trump…this is about an active genocide. Biden has the power to stop support; this is on him, not on the people speaking up against genocide

          Edit: I mean we could have 6+ months of not supporting a state engaging in genocide no matter how the election goes, and I think that’s ok. Hell, Biden might even gain supporters if he stop aid to Israel…but that’s not brought up.

          • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
            3·
            7 months ago

            Remember when someone said there are two choices here, and both perpetuated genocide but one was also worse in every other aspect?

            You either pick the least-worse choice, or accept that your silence endorsed or at least accepted the worse one.

            That’s the choice. Voting in a bad choice is a tough thing to do, and it’s the second-worst thing that could happen that day.

          • Nelots@lemm.eeEnglish
            361·
            7 months ago

            Unfortunately, when your options are picking the guy who supports genocide or picking the guy who absolutely will also support genocide but is worse in every other way, you have you make choices you aren’t happy with. I think it’s safe to say few people here want the genocide to continue, we are simply powerless to do anything about it.

          • Passerby6497@lemmy.worldEnglish
            172·
            7 months ago

            How dumb do you have to be to not realize that there’s no choice available that isn’t genocide? There is (and was in 2020) no one on the ticket with a chance of winning that wasn’t going to support Israel.

            If the choice is genocide, or genocide harder plus fascism, you’d have to have your head caved in to think that trump is the better choice. I fucking hate it, but that’s reality at the moment

            • ikidd@lemmy.worldEnglish
              27·
              7 months ago

              Jesus, how are we here? No choice of a candidate that doesn’t support Israel despite them committing (currently, like right now) genocide.

              What a fucking mess.

              • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
                42·
                7 months ago

                True. Now vote in the least-worse like an adult and campaign for actual decency on the next run.

          • LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world
            173·
            7 months ago

            Yeah listen to yourself. Calling him Genocide Joe as if that region was bastion of peace since last 2000+ years and Joe somehow came up with this idea - hey what if we do a little genocide here.

            Get the fuck out of here if you can not see that this war is waged with exactly one purpose - distract the pro-democracy movements all around the world and people like you are either complicit or at least useful idiots playing in the hands of pro-war fascists.

          • prole@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            71·
            7 months ago

            If I pick “Sleepy Joe” does that mean I’m picking sleep?

            See how stupid that is?

      • SrTobi@feddit.de
        24·
        7 months ago

        Please explain how trump would have been better and not worse in the Isreal situation?

        • prole@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          10·
          7 months ago

          He would/will be so much goddamn worse.

          And all these fucking trolls who suddenly care about the plight of the Palestinian people (really guys they do), insofar as they can use it to criticize the president of the United States, will be nowhere to be found.

          Those that are actually real will crawl back into their holes, and never admit they were wrong to push people to not vote.

  • cordlesslamp@lemmy.today
    52·
    7 months ago

    To think that Trump is still a running president candidate and endorsing by republican is crazy.

    Or am I too sensitive? Maybe I’m just an outsider (not American) and doesn’t know what I’m talking about.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      44·
      7 months ago

      No, you reflect how a lot of Americans feel. For me it’s not just Trump himself that’s crazy, but the politics around Trump. A decent chunk of population wants an autocrat running the show.

      • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
        18·
        7 months ago

        Unfortunately there’s also a lot of Americans being hoodwinked into thinking that this is now part and parcel of modern politics, the other guy is worse and the “liberal media” bury it. In a normal world, the polls should not be 50/50 if one of them is Trump.

        • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
          14·
          7 months ago

          Murdoch has been working on Repub propaganda for decades and that mass brainwashing has been successful.

    • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
      38·
      7 months ago

      The headline seems a bit inaccurate. It stipulates that the bond will be accepted as long as Trump’s collateral for the bond – $175M held in an account with Charles Schwab – is not invested in securities. So as long as it sits there liquid. Essentially it makes all the wishy washy language in the deal and the debate about the bond issuer’s cash on hand kind of moot and almost as if Trump had put up $175M in escrow.

  • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
    361·
    7 months ago

    Why doesn’t New York just hand him several million dollars and a court ordered professional wanking? He’s defied court orders, threatened staff and family of the court, missed deadlines, provided fraudulent agreements. He has done all sorts of misconduct. If it were one of us, we’d be in jail with our assets seized.

  • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
    26·
    7 months ago

    I think Trump’s buddy Vince McMahon has liquidated all his stock and is sitting on like 2 billion cash, I thought he was gonna bail Trump out honestly. These rapists like to stick together.

      • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
        9·
        7 months ago

        I heard they’ve always had a competitive thing going, like “my plane is nicer than yours!” Type thing. It’s crazy that the last time I watched wrestling like 20 years ago, Vince was a low millionaire, now he’s a billionaire and way richer than Trump and can prove it. He’s probably waving his money in Donald’s face and laughing.

        • GluWu@lemm.ee
          13·
          7 months ago

          Its crazy that they’re both rapists that still have money and freedom.

          • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
            183·
            7 months ago

            Rape isn’t so bad

            It’s skipping rent and stealing food that you have to look out for

          • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
            2·
            7 months ago

            I figured McMahon was liquifying his assets so he could flee to Switzerland if and when he’s charged with human trafficking

      • EnderMB@lemmy.world
        5·
        7 months ago

        The ROI used to be getting his wife into politics. That ship has sailed with their separation and his numerous allegations.

        If Trump can get him back into his company, that $2B is basically his.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    18·
    7 months ago

    The judge was just using a metaphor, but I like to think that he was actually referring to a fictional TV show which was about a crafty politician, but that crafty politician was played by a guy who devoted his off-time to sexual assault and sexual harassment.

  • Chainweasel@lemmy.worldEnglish
    182·
    7 months ago

    So, Trump will lose the appeal, KISC will be left with the bill they can’t pay, they’ll fight it on the grounds that they’re not based in NY and delay the judgement by tieing it up in the courts. If Trump wins, he uses his influence to either get them off the hook, or he’ll funnel dirty Russian money into KISC to pay it off for them.

    • Omgboom
      12·
      7 months ago

      Or Trump will tell Knight Specialty Insurance to pound sand like he does with all his other bills

      • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
        12·
        7 months ago

        I mean, he didn’t even pay Rudy, and that man stood in a goddamn landscaping company forecourt to defend his election stealing attempt.

        Refusing to pay back a loan is straight “for me it was Tuesday” territory. Serves them right for lending it to him.

      • Chainweasel@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        7 months ago

        That’s why was clear that he would either make it disappear using his position as dictator, or use someone else’s money.
        Stiffing them is definitely in the cards too though.

      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
        3·
        7 months ago

        This is exactly what will happen. Unfortunately that turns it into a civil case so Donald would be able to successfully keep his money.

      • FilterItOut@thelemmy.club
        3·
        7 months ago

        No, in another article from last week, he had put the amount they wanted in a separate bank account for them. It was more than the settlement amount. The bonder, at the least, isn’t going to lose money from Trump.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          4·
          7 months ago

          If that money is not serving as multiple collateral at once. Stiffing creditors is a big part of the Trump game.

          And keep in mind, by the time he would lose on appeal trump owes 500 million. The government will then ask the bondsman for the 175 million and ask/ take from Trump any assets to complete the fine, starting with liquid assets like a bank account with cash then auctioning off illiquid assets for cash.

          How the bondsman recupes from Trump is the bondsman’s problem. But I cannot imagine they have dibs on his cash.

    • baru@lemmy.world
      11·
      7 months ago

      they’ll fight it on the grounds that they’re not based in NY

      No, they will add that this will be subject to NY law. Plus some other bits. It was discussed here: https://youtu.be/wEOuLQ_x8yY

      Video has an ex-judge that was in the courtroom.