Donald Trump: Classic or Dud?

If I correctly understand what I just heard reported on MSNBC, the ruling bars Trump from obtaining any loans from any bank or business which is licensed to do business in New York state for a period of 3 years. That will totally screw over his ability to pay judgments against him without liquidating large amounts of his assets.

Oh darn!

Especially since IIRC if he wants to appeal he has to put up the amount fined within 30 days.

Would you be okay with him being rendered ineffective by completely illegal subterfuge?

Show me some illegal subterfuge and then I'll consider what it means to me.

Fraud on me vs Down on Me vs Crazy on on You...

Any word on whether he will ever actually pay anything out as a result of these fines/judgments/rulings?

I know that it is not good news for him, but I just want to make sure he suffers, instead of kicking the can down the road endlessly.

With any luck, the stress will kill him.

Any word on whether he will ever actually pay anything out as a result of these fines/judgments/rulings?

of course not that's what the RNC is for

Further thought: It's interesting that all these cases and appeals and fines and civil judgments are being handled by his lawyers. Lawyers that he has no intention of paying, ever.

Motherfucker needs some goddamn consequences

This, of course, will only cause his cult to rally around him even more fervently. Thus, this is Bad News For Joe Biden.

"Fraud On Me" was R.E.M.'s best single to date imo

greasy crappy people yelling chants

^^ to the tune of "Shiny Happy People"

dying

We already guessed, Alfred

Any word on whether he will ever actually pay anything out as a result of these fines/judgments/rulings?

of course not that's what the RNC is for

― frogbs, Friday, February 16, 2024 3:26 PM (seven minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

https://www.yahoo.com/news/truth-trump-rnc-shakeup-why-094025392.html

"During a monumental election year for the GOP, Trump has effectively taken over the Republican National Committee, a bid to ensure that the national fundraising juggernaut will chiefly serve him, and not other Republican efforts."

I suppose the complete destruction of the GOP is a lot to hope for, but....

his dumbass boys were fined 4 million each, and also banned from running things for 2 years.

Of course he's not beaten, yet, but this ruling strikes very hard at the foundations of his power and best of all, like the Carroll judgments, it isn't being conducted through the federal courts. So, may I be pardoned if just for this moment I pump my fist and shout WOO-HOOOOOO!

right there with ya man

350 + 83 for the Jean Carrol case, is 433 million a lot

but I thought he's rich

So wait a minute, the thing about not doing business with any banks licensed to do business in NY…. that would be most (all?) major banks right?

If you think about it, there's no better way for him to prove his wealth than to just pay out, right?

let's just say that the walls of his dining room are not safe from his next meal

Every plate he throws at the wall will just be $5 less to sell on eBay.

would any of this have been investigated had he not decided to run for president?

Almost certainly not.

His pattern was buying off people who sued on the one hand and on the other trying to hide in plain sight in terms of his own dealings. He wanted the fame ticket, he got it, and here we are.

This may already be old news to US readers, but for this Britishes I found it a pretty useful summary of Trump's finances and his ability to pay out:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68175846

who gets to be the court-appointed monitor who has to look after all of Trump's finances in New York? that oughta be a fun job! maybe they give it to someone in nyc government as punishment.

i must have missed this but that monitor - a former judge - played a big role in the ruling today. proving that that Trump was just going to keep doing his lying thing.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-organization-monitor-flags-errors-financial-misstatements-ahead/story?id=106737467

that would be most (all?) major banks right?

NY and London are the financial capitols of the world and any bank willing to grant an individual loan of that magnitude is almost certainly going to have a license to operate in NY. All this will become clearer as the ruling takes full effect. This won't destroy him, but it will hurt him in a very real way.

greasy crappy people yelling chants

because throwback hilarity/applause is whenever you get to it, i hereby entype this standing LOL

deutschebank you fuckin bitches, we’re waiting

You just know that from now to the day he dies, Trump will call NY Attorney General James several bad names every time he opens his mouth in public, and probably in private, too.

adjusting for inflation that's almost the entirety of his original inheritance, the poor fella. how unfair

he had, like, zero dollars before he did his reality game show. he's just going back to his 90s roots of penniless grifter windbag who pretends to be rich.

ready for the NFT of him as a penniless hobo with fingerless gloves and a cigar stub

I'll believe he's actually suffering financially the day I see the dumb ass huge "TRUMP" sign come off his tower here in Chicago.

Mitchell Epner's Bluesky reply thread starting here of interest in terms of the likelihood of the appeals going anywhere. (In sum, small.) C/P for ease:

1. Trump can appeal without posting security, but that would allow immediate enforcement of the judgments (ie - seizing over $400M in disgorgement and interest. If he wants to stay enforcement, he will have to put up cash or a supersedeas bond in the full amount (including accrued interest).

2. The three year ban would run from the day that it was first imposed. If the trial court (or appellate division) stays enforcement of the ban on serving as an officer/director of a NY Corp pending appeal, then the 3 year ban would only start when the stay was lifted.

3. In a bench trial, the Court's findings of fact are given full deference & can only be overturned on a finding of "clear error". On my initial read, Justice Engoron did a thorough job supporting his factual conclusions, including making credibility judgments that are NEVER reversed on appeal.

4. On p.6, Justice Engoron to care to appeal-proof his fact finding: "This Court listened carefully to every witness, every question, every answer. Witnesses testified from the witness stand, approximately a yard from the Court, who was thus able to observe expressions, demeanor, and body language."

So basically Trump wants to appeal, his lawyers are playing along, but they also know they're fucked (whether Trump knows, frankly that's an open question at this point!)

i still can't get over the chutzpah of continuing to go after hunter biden for trading on his father's name when lara trump was just appointed co-chair of the RNC while the DOJ indicted the star witness against hunter biden. and that's nowhere near the top ten most consequential things surrounding these trump republicans in the past three days

Via WaPo:

Donald Trump’s campaign is trying to raise money off the judgment against him in the civil fraud case. “DEMOCRAT JUDGE JUST RULED AGAINST ME!” Trump wrote in a text message, seeking donations. He added, “We need a MASSIVE PEACEFUL PUSHBACK right here, right now.”

Roffle at the 'peaceful' bit, which of course he's had to do plenty of times now in the past few years.

I dunno, I'm starting to lean classic.

has there ever been anything like him? i guess only actual panamanian strongmen. or al capone or something.

P.T. Barnum, maybe? But Barnum surely was much smarter.

Don King?

this is my favorite historical comparison

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/169159

Oh, yeah, I also thought of Commodus.

i guess if huey long had lived and become president we would have seen something similarly bizarre.

AG James is rubbing it in live right now. gotcha, asshole!

Injecting that Schadenfreude directly into my veins.

Jeffrey Clark's disciplinary proceeding in DC continues not to go well for him and his X timeline is positively deranged.

Just a snippet from last fall:

The committee rejected the motion two days after it was entered, writing that Clark "has continually misrepresented [the] disciplinary counsel's theory of the case to manufacture imaginary defenses."