this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
389 points (98.5% liked)

politics

19088 readers
3870 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Wow, someone actually finally managed to force Trump to pay a bill.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago (2 children)

True, but in order to get that bond, he had to put up collateral.

[–] Atom@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Right, not disputing that at all. I'm just saying he's (or whoever is footing the bill) a long way from actually paying anyone their due.

[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 37 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The point of the bond is that if the appeal fails, the court just hands the money over - shes probably more likely to see the cash this way than if he didn't appeal.

Appeals court doesn't give you a "do over" - they don't try the case again, they don't re-decide facts. Appeals court lets you argue that the previous court made an error in procedure. Given how competent Carrols' lawyers were and how totally incompetent Trump's were, I doubt they will be able to find anything.

[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

So whats the end game? Like ofc delay, but I don't get it unless this is like the Saudis taking a multi-billion loss on helping Muskovitch aquire Twitter cuz there's no limit to the upside of them dismantling an ongoing threat to them.

Like his debt and legal problems are nothing on the nation-state actor level, this is all horrifying in that light. Lots of dirty, dumb shit happening. His appeals are hopeless, he must be planning on violently dismantling their abillity to enforce it

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So whats the end game?

Win or steal the presidency, and convert the position to king, probably.

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Basically this. His endgame plan is "become president, get the DOJ or Congress or the SC to rule he can't be made to pay for anything".

[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago (2 children)

He's not playing 4D chess. This isn't some master plan. He is appealing because his choices are:

  • Appeal, put the bond up, hope he can stall for a while and maybe something comes up, probably loose later
  • Accept the verdict, loose now and either;
    • Pay the judgement
    • Refuse to pay the judgement and have people who cannot be threatened, bullied or argued with come seize assets
[–] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

I'm more referring to whoever's enabling this by doing his bond for him, how do they expect to be paid back? He's lost the 2 (maybe 3) battles of this "war" already

[–] stangel@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Chubb Tower has a ring to it.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

Not a nice ring mind you

[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago
  • $90 million isn't that much money if you are a large company and want the president of the US to owe you a favour.
  • The CEO of Chubb had a pretty cushy white house role under trump, maybe this is a favour being repaid at the expense of Chubbs shareholders

Either way, most other countries call this corruption

[–] cqthca@reddthat.com 2 points 8 months ago

"never quit" is His Thing

[–] Instigate@aussie.zone 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

At this point Trump is trying to delay everything he can until the presidential election, because he’s hoping that he’ll win again which will give him some kind of immunity against civil and criminal prosecution for another four years. I assume he thinks he’ll get into power and arbitrarily change laws to try to exonerate himself, despite the fact that that won’t really work because he’s being sued/tried under state laws, but I don’t think he’s smart enough to figure that out.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Also he will sell himself and the country to whoever will pay in a way that he can get it. Then use that to pay off his bills. Plus, I don't think he plans on ever leaving the white house if he gets in this time. And at his age, he might be right, just in a different way than he imagines.

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago
[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

Did he actually, though?