The good news for serial sex abuser Donald Trump (SSAT) is that a panel of New York state appeals court judges has agreed to a reduction in the bond that he has to pay in his appeal of the civil fraud judgment obtained by state attorney general Letitia James to $175 million, and given him ten days to come up with the money. The original amount of $454 million plus interest was due today and SSAT’s lawyers had said that he could not pay it. This allows the appeal to go ahead once he pays this reduced amount but he will still have to pay the full amount if his appeal fails. The appeals process could take several months.
The bad news for him is that the judge overseeing the criminal case involving his hush money payments to Stormy Daniels has rejected his appeal for further delays and has scheduled the trial to begin on April 15th with jury selection. The original trial date was set to begin earlier this month and Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg had already agreed to a one month delay due to new documents surfacing.
The documents related to federal prosecutors’ investigation of Michael Cohen, Trump’s onetime consigliere turned prosecution witness. Several US attorney’s offices had the documents in question, not the Manhattan DA. Manhattan state prosecutors had turned over many documents from Cohen’s federal proceedings to Trump’s team; the disclosures relate to some documents that had not been given to Bragg’s office.
Trump, prosecutors said, shuffled hundreds of thousands of dollars to Cohen as part of his effort to cover up allegations of extramarital affairs, and then listed the payouts as legal costs in his business records. In April 2023, prosecutors charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records, a class E felony.
Bragg’s office said that Cohen paid $130,000 to Daniels and coordinated with the National Enquirer’s publisher to give the former Playboy model Karen McDougal $150,000, to thwart their accounts of sexual encounters with Trump, which he denies. Trump’s namesake company then repaid Cohen $420,000 in a handful of installments, prosecutors said.
Since this is a criminal trial, SSAT is required to attend the proceedings which could last for several weeks.
Rejected his appeal, but according to the Guardian his team intend to appeal again? They can do that?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/25/trump-court-appearance-stormy-daniels
The reduction in bond is so frustrating. If Mr. Average Citizen had a $100,000 bond and simply couldn’t come up with the money, I have no doubt a judge would start seizing assets (car, maybe house, bank accounts, etc. as allowed by law--I am not a lawyer so I’m just guessing what can be taken).
I do want to see him lose his property, but I think it’s judicious to give him a 10 day extension to secure a bond before executing the judgement and acting on the lien. I’m pretty sure he loses the bond if his appeal is unsuccessful, in addition to have to satisfy the judgement. NY can always take his Golf Course, it’s not going anywhere.
They would prefer cash.
Sadly, making him go begging to foreign interests for financial support might present a danger to the country’s best interests.
Since not making him go begging to foreign interests for financial support also presents a danger to the country’s best interests, that comparison is moot.
Therefore, might as well make him beg. No loss.
From the never fully-revealed Deutsche Bank investigations, I think Trump has had a long history of begging foreign interests for financial support.
As for the delays, the game being played by Team Trump is to delay as long as possible. The game being played by the prosecution is to get the trial moving as quickly as possible. But there is a third player, and that is the Judge. The judge has to limit the possibility of a miss-trial being found on appeal. So any request by Team Trump which has the slightest chance of being miss-interpreted on appeal as being unfair to Trump has to be seriously considered and some accommodation made for it. That’s why the bond required for appeal was lowered, why the time to come up with the bond was extended, and why the hush money trial was delayed.
And of course Team Trump waits to make these requests on the last possible day to do so, because that delays things further. The judge can curse out Trump’s lawyers all he wants, but he has to avoid making any ruling on any topic which could be presented as evidence of improper procedure during an appeals court hearing.
Trying to force the court to make a mistake so that an appeal would be in the client’s favor is really only a good strategy if you first; know the client cannot win the case on merit, and second; know the client will appeal. These are both pretty obviously true in this case. This tactic also only really works for wealthy/powerful clients. The average Joe can’t afford to plan on making an appeal when defending the initial case.
[Well-expressed, cogent, and even succinct, flex. Nice]
It is possible that someone realized how much Trump actually has, and they lowered the bond to make him put up all of it. That way they don’t have to deal with the messy part of chasing him down and prying the money out of his grubby hands.
Also, does anyone think he has a chance of winning his appeal? He’ll never pay Chubb and he has already lost E Jean Carrol 1 and 2. So Chubb was just giving him money.
He probably wouldn’t take (and lose) Putin’s money. You don’t deadbeat someone with a supply of polonium or novichok, let alone someone with both.
Seth Meyers provides a fun summary:
“Desperate Trump Abandoned by Rich Friends, Begs for Money to Pay Fines: A Closer Look”
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=imwlaNOV_Go
@7:
Putin wouldn’t care. If it makes you guys look like an even bigger bunch of tits then it’s money well spent. (Not like it’s his money in the first place.)
Also:
‘Jon Stewart Deconstructs Trump’s “Victimless” $450 Million Fraud | The Daily Show ‘
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=EDMinX6t1Zk
@7, Marcus, who wrote,
I don’t think anyone expects Trump to *win* on appeal. But if they can convince an appeals court that the original trial was conducted poorly they may get the case dismissed. And they will probably try to do that with appeals all the way up to the USSC, or until Trump dies.
I’m pretty sure that would be called a win.
He can’t get the case dismissed, he already lost. The only thing he might get on appeal is a reduction in his judgement. It is a bit unprecedented, but then again, the depths of the fraud are also unprecedented.
Interesting point. Assuming you’re right…
You’re Trump -- what’s your gameplan? You’ve already lost the case… you appeal the magnitude of the punishment. You win/lose the appeal. You appeal again. Sooner or later someone comes after you for the money. You don’t give it to them. Suddenly your assets are hard to find. So… what? They take you to court to GET your assets… and that case takes how long to get to court? It takes until after the election, at which point the case gets dismissed. And yes, you’ve been found guilty… whoopy f’kin doo if nobody can make anything meaningful happen to you as a result. Do you really think he’s ever going to see the inside of a cell?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m as infuriated by all this as you.
SSAT just got issued a gag order.
https://www.meidastouch.com/news/trump-hit-with-another-gag-order
He is going to have a hard time hiding his assets in NY because he lost this fraud case, and has a court appointed judge and independent consultant overseeing his businesses for years.
The latest 10 day extension doesn’t affect that part of the civil judgement. The AG has filed the liens against his properties, and the judge gave him another week to secure a reduced bond. If he fails to secure that bond, the liens will be executed. He can in fact appeal the case without posting the bond. I’m sure those court appointed overseers are watching every funding source with great interest.
To clarify, he can appeal the amount of the judgement regardless of his ability to post a bond, he can post a lesser bond to stay the execution of the judgement while he appeals the amount due, but he cannot appeal the civil fraud conviction any more than he can appeal his defamation and sexual assault civil convictions.
Next up, NY starts the criminal trial involving hush money and Stormy Daniels. He really doesn’t want that to happen, for obvious reasons.
That anyone thinks he is a candidate for anything but a jail cell just boggles my sensibilities.
You find it amazing that anyone acknowledges reality? He IS going to be the candidate, regardless of your precious sensibilities… unless you’ve got another name in mind and an extremely sound explanation for why they’re going to be the candidate instead, an explanation that literally nobody else has thought of or mentioned.
Look down the right hand column of this page: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/
I agree that it’s mind-boggling that anyone’s prepared to vote for him, but it’s not so mind-boggling that I’d be prepared to ignore reality. Clinton ignored reality in 2016, and we all know where that got her*.
Please stop with this arrogant, complacent “he’ll never be the candidate/can’t possibly win the election” talk. Take the threat of him seriously, because look at those polls -- it is serious. You can relax and say “I told you so” AFTER he’s lost the election this year, and we’ll all be happy.
*(Yes, crybabies -- it got her victory in the popular vote. Which is to say, about as much use as would have been victory in the Eurovision song contest or the Olympic dressage, i.e. no fucking use at all so stop going on about it every time someone mentions her losing to the second worst candidate in US presidential election history).
In related news
Stephen Colbert:
Oaf Of Wall Street
“Trump’s Wealth Surges As DJT Goes Public”
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=ddb104fcptM
@ 18 sonofrojblake
I’ll probably regret asking, but in your peculiar worldview who is the “first worst”?
#20
Wi oylvs Yxpnucg. Bvrewmp qn yxw rynclzpv yictdmxiy, nsm wfgwv wlvdzsevy ta wydixyc tojtw cho bhv qiun ta wydixyc eieh; lg xzms edx rycuik praiym tf htguv wf stwv ic eoihx euyliupxg nz uerc ‘ajcnp wfjpf glse kwi dydb pitwkxpvt’. Z rep uwzersc uyp pij gicmzviev: xjy mmsk xw ybzmvvg kgnd bo vceen epezg akfw jetpyuy epak bichd bhvn kgn dpik sspy lvd saej vwih rs rcodmad.
Xx’u ppzy ‘ed gqhemxkjenfj vurcggx oqstjwuczv ffg cqo! Xg ieiitjcmtrimqh zvlp!’ #hswjyizz
The only question I have is why I bother answering misogynist douchbags from England who think polls are accurate. The same polls have been wildly wrong ever since the orange taint crept over America.
Stop listening to the chicken littles and corporate media. The women of America will be saving democracy, again.
Holms @ # 21 -- Aw c’mon. That ain’t ROT-13; judging from the 1st word of your 2nd ‘graf, it can’t be simple transliteration of anything in English.
Tethys @ # 22 -- Aw c’mon also. Please look up “just world fallacy”, and the plethora of news reports on voter suppression and election transgressions in general across the US.
Tethys,
Thank you for the correction. I was under the impression that an appeals court looks to see if the lower court applied law and precedent correctly, and can even review the facts presented in the case. I understood that If the appeals court finds that laws and precedent (including precedents concerning court procedure), were not properly followed, or even that there was a bias by the court which could affect the judgement, they could overturn the decision of a lower court. Regardless of the findings of the lower court.
Now, maybe the judge’s behavior doesn’t matter as much at this point because the trial is over. Trump has been found guilty. But I’m certain that any indication of bias by the judge, even at this point, would be brought up by Trump’s lawyers when the appeal is heard. So even now the judge has to display impartiality and neutrality, and act as if the requests from Team Trump are being made in good faith (even though we know they are not), and grant them if they are (quote) reasonable (unquote).
We can predict even now that Team Trump will argue in appeal that the decision was made by a biased court. That is inevitable; they are saying that to the general public now. But it’s still best not to give Trump’s lawyers something to point to when they make that claim.
Flex
I’m sure his lawyers will attempt to get the case dismissed on procedural grounds, but the fraud is very well documented, which is why I believe the best they might get on appeal is a reduction of the judgement.
Unfortunately, it’s a civil case, so he is liable for fraud rather than guilty. The hush money case is criminal, and the fool is already violating his gag order to attack the Judge’s daughter. If I was the judge, I’d have him tossed in a cell for contempt of court.
It would be great to not hear anything from him for a few weeks.
Pierce
I’m not sure what your point is here? The voter suppression and election transgressions are mostly figments of der furors imagination, or are being committed by his supporters. There is also the Georgia criminal case, which is currently being revised by the prosecution to tighten up some of their case.
These are people who claim Taylor Swift rigged the Super Bowl, so I don’t find them very credible.
Like they did in 2016, eh?
Pardon me if I don’t have much faith in “the women of America” -- too many of them are provably fucking morons. As are the men, obvs.
Also:
THAT WAS HIS POINT YOU FUCKING IDIOT.
Voter suppression and electoral transgressions -- and a plethora of morons, of course -- are on course to put Trump in the White House. The complacent liberal electorate -- i.e. YOU and people like you -- underestimated him and took it for granted he couldn’t win once before. It seems incredible to me that you’ve not learned ANY lessons from that humiliation, beyond flinging the spurious charge of “misogyny” against anything that disagrees with you.
Tethys @ # 26: The voter suppression and election transgressions are mostly figments of der furors imagination…
Uh, no. As usual, Trump & the Trumpublicans enjoy accusing others of the crimes they themselves chronically commit (see here for examples in just my home state; multiply by every state and municipality where Repubs have control of voting processes).
These are people who claim Taylor Swift rigged the Super Bowl, so I don’t find them very credible.
Please check your sources. I don’t think the League of Women Voters and/or the NAACP have accused Ms Swift of anything nefarious; despite what you may hear from False Noise and its ilk, these and many other organizations have great credibility -- and great alarm -- on this issue.
Tethys @ # 29 -- My longer reply, with enough links to trigger our esteemed host’s comment filter, “is awaiting moderation”.
Meanwhile, please just look up Republican voter suppression. (Sorry if this harshes your buzz…)
@sonof #28:
Right, but you don’t have to be a jerk about it
Sorry Pierce, but I don’t know what buzz you are talking about. I think you might be reading something into my comment?
Everything I said is in reference to his court losses/ bonds/appeals. Voter suppression is an entirely different topic.
Tethys @ # 32: Everything I said is in reference to his court losses/ bonds/appeals.
Oh yeah?
Tethys @ # 22: The women of America will be saving democracy, again.
This time, I ask you to look up non sequitur.
@Pierce
Why are you trying to start a fight over that? It’s a semi tongue in cheek response to the chicken little who keeps peeping on about polls.
I’m not complacent, and will continue engaging in efforts to flip my neighboring states this November based on women’s reproductive rights.
I “chicken little”d in 2016.
And the fucking sky fell in.
So do, please, excuse me if I get annoyed when I see the same arrogance and complacency from people who are apparently either too young or too stupid to remember something that happened 8 years ago.
Tethys @ # 34 -- Nice backpedalling, but not altogether persuasive.
… the chicken little who keeps peeping on about polls.
The polls, AND the voter suppression both in evidence and in (so to speak) gestation, AND the state-legislature-level machinations, AND the national-level House gambit, AND the Big-Lie motivated ”soldiers” that Trumpistas threaten to deploy at voting stations in November, AND …
Do you maybe need more links?
If you took the actual threat seriously, would you use a dismissive phrase like “chicken little” -- or even think it?
Since this thread is in fact about criminal loses by trump, yes, I am refusing to get drawn into a tangential argument.
Too late -- but it’s never too late for a tactical retreat when you know you can’t hold your ground anyway.