Scrutable

bjn wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 07, 2024 11:32 pm

Grumble wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 07, 2024 11:29 pm

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 07, 2024 10:20 pm

Trump request for stay on having to pay E Jean Carroll money denied

https://x.com/gtconway3d/status/1765862 ... 64999?s=61

I’ll believe it when E Jean Carroll confirms she’s received the money.

With any luck she gets to own a chunk of prime manhattan real estate in a few days, or the proceeds from its sale at the very least.

The Trump Tower was valued at US$371 million in 2016, when the tower had ~60 stores in it. It now has just one (Gucci) and is on a debt watch list; plus the price of the apartments in Trump Tower has halved from 2013 to 2024. It might be that the sale of Trump Tower in a fire sale won't raise enough to pay E Jean Carroll.

You wonder what the Fraud case debts (~US$450 million) will require to be sold, as I think Trump has about a week to pay the bond or forfeit his right to appeal.

bjn wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 07, 2024 11:32 pm

Grumble wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 07, 2024 11:29 pm

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 07, 2024 10:20 pm

Trump request for stay on having to pay E Jean Carroll money denied

https://x.com/gtconway3d/status/1765862 ... 64999?s=61

I’ll believe it when E Jean Carroll confirms she’s received the money.

With any luck she gets to own a chunk of prime manhattan real estate in a few days, or the proceeds from its sale at the very least.

In other great news for Trump the Stormy Daniels doc is out soon. Apparently she got death threats too https://x.com/ronfilipkowski/status/176 ... 41652?s=61

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 04, 2024 11:52 am

lpm wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 04, 2024 10:51 am

The message from the poll is that voters consider Biden too old to be an effective President.

Really worrying that this clear signal is being ignored.

And it's being ignored on spurious grounds - that it is not true and that Trump is worse. Both are irrelevant.

It's not being ignored. But there's not much that can be done about it that doesn't have a worse effect. Certainly it's too late to replace Biden on primary ballots.

Harris is starting to get more coverage in useful directions - calling for ceasefire in Gaza, for example

But the reason voters think this is that the press is doing a "her emails" thing about it. Hopefully they're doing it early enough that it'll be old news by the conventions.

What if Biden's team were waiting until after Trump got the nomination (earlier this week) to counter this attack with the SOTU speech?

And after the Rolling Stone article about the widespread use of speed and Xanax in the Trump White House.

Can a bankruptee be President? Just wondering...

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 1:57 pm

Can a bankruptee be President? Just wondering...

Hardly anything stops you from being president.

But paying for your campaign might be difficult.

monkey wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:06 pm

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 1:57 pm

Can a bankruptee be President? Just wondering...

Hardly anything stops you from being president.

But paying for your campaign might be difficult.

though, that said, getting someone else to pay is rather his modus operandi

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:16 pm

monkey wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:06 pm

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 1:57 pm

Can a bankruptee be President? Just wondering...

Hardly anything stops you from being president.

But paying for your campaign might be difficult.

though, that said, getting someone else to pay is rather his modus operandi

That's true of most politicians, especially American ones. There's not a lot by way of central funding from the parties like there is in the UK. It's one of the reasons lobbyists can be so powerful here.

monkey wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:34 pm

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:16 pm

monkey wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:06 pm

Hardly anything stops you from being president.

But paying for your campaign might be difficult.

though, that said, getting someone else to pay is rather his modus operandi

That's true of most politicians, especially American ones. There's not a lot by way of central funding from the parties like there is in the UK. It's one of the reasons lobbyists can be so powerful here.

But you can tick the box to give $3 to the presidential election campaign fund on your tax return (it gets split between major parties).

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 12:56 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 04, 2024 11:52 am

lpm wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 04, 2024 10:51 am

The message from the poll is that voters consider Biden too old to be an effective President.

Really worrying that this clear signal is being ignored.

And it's being ignored on spurious grounds - that it is not true and that Trump is worse. Both are irrelevant.

It's not being ignored. But there's not much that can be done about it that doesn't have a worse effect. Certainly it's too late to replace Biden on primary ballots.

Harris is starting to get more coverage in useful directions - calling for ceasefire in Gaza, for example

But the reason voters think this is that the press is doing a "her emails" thing about it. Hopefully they're doing it early enough that it'll be old news by the conventions.

What if Biden's team were waiting until after Trump got the nomination (earlier this week) to counter this attack with the SOTU speech?

And after the Rolling Stone article about the widespread use of speed and Xanax in the Trump White House.

What would make this particularly delicious is that the Republicans delayed the SOTU address for political gain (the date is set by the speaker of the house)

Trump posts the 91.63 million dollar bond for E Jean Carroll

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .317.0.pdf

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:45 pm

monkey wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:34 pm

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 3:16 pm

though, that said, getting someone else to pay is rather his modus operandi

That's true of most politicians, especially American ones. There's not a lot by way of central funding from the parties like there is in the UK. It's one of the reasons lobbyists can be so powerful here.

But you can tick the box to give $3 to the presidential election campaign fund on your tax return (it gets split between major parties).

I don't think a candidate in the big election has taken that money this century (not sure about Bush). It's a hefty amount, but not as hefty as private fundraising, which you not allowed to do if you take the public fund.

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 4:18 pm

Trump posts the 91.63 million dollar bond for E Jean Carroll

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .317.0.pdf

A bond rather than cash, which is notable given the other bond he would have to post to appeal.

ETA: and what else he might have to secure that bond on.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 5:25 pm

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 4:18 pm

Trump posts the 91.63 million dollar bond for E Jean Carroll

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .317.0.pdf

A bond rather than cash, which is notable given the other bond he would have to post to appeal.

ETA: and what else he might have to secure that bond on.

What even is a bond? Is it a promise to pay her?

Grumble wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 6:00 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 5:25 pm

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 4:18 pm

Trump posts the 91.63 million dollar bond for E Jean Carroll

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .317.0.pdf

A bond rather than cash, which is notable given the other bond he would have to post to appeal.

ETA: and what else he might have to secure that bond on.

What even is a bond? Is it a promise to pay her?

Pretty much, but only if he looses the appeal, which I imagine he will.

It will have to be backed by something, my guess is by his property, or some rich sycophant has promised to pay it. Someone's going to loose an awful lot of money.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 6:00 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 5:25 pm

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 4:18 pm

Trump posts the 91.63 million dollar bond for E Jean Carroll

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .317.0.pdf

A bond rather than cash, which is notable given the other bond he would have to post to appeal.

ETA: and what else he might have to secure that bond on.

What even is a bond? Is it a promise to pay her?

It's a contract with a bond insurer, whereby they put up the money so you can appeal, for a fee, but you don't have to pay the full amount to them until you lose the appeal.

It's basically the same as a bail bond, but for a civil judgement.

monkey wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 6:18 pm

Grumble wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 6:00 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 5:25 pm

A bond rather than cash, which is notable given the other bond he would have to post to appeal.

ETA: and what else he might have to secure that bond on.

What even is a bond? Is it a promise to pay her?

Pretty much, but only if he looses the appeal, which I imagine he will.

It will have to be backed by something, my guess is by his property, or some rich sycophant has promised to pay it. Someone's going to loose an awful lot of money.

Musk? MBS?

The bond is from Chubb, a large multinational insurance company.

bolo wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 8:28 pm

The bond is from Chubb, a large multinational insurance company.

Yeah I see Trump appointed Chubb Group CEO Evan Greenberg to the Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations in 2018. Hmmmmm.

Makes sense. He is covered until the results of the appeal, which will be well after he is president again, so no payment until 2029 at least.
By then who knows what could happen.

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 11:49 pm

Makes sense. He is covered until the results of the appeal, which will be well after he is president again, so no payment until 2029 at least.
By then who knows what could happen.

Everything about this post is wrong

As this article on the immunities or otherwise of presidents reminds us, the case of Clinton v. Jones proceeded while Clinton was president, despite his attempt to delay it. Presidents can prevent some cases from proceeding while in office, and may have some immunities in relation to official acts. But they can't stop everything.

My suspicion would be that these cases requiring bonds to appeal are the kind that don't stop just because you are president.

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Sat Mar 09, 2024 11:22 am

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 08, 2024 11:49 pm

Makes sense. He is covered until the results of the appeal, which will be well after he is president again, so no payment until 2029 at least.
By then who knows what could happen.

Everything about this post is wrong

So par for the course for H?

IvanV wrote: ↑

Sat Mar 09, 2024 11:27 am

As this article on the immunities or otherwise of presidents reminds us, the case of Clinton v. Jones proceeded while Clinton was president, despite his attempt to delay it. Presidents can prevent some cases from proceeding while in office, and may have some immunities in relation to official acts. But they can't stop everything.

My suspicion would be that these cases requiring bonds to appeal are the kind that don't stop just because you are president.

The cases have already concluded, and judgement entered into the record. The appeals against the verdicts are all that's left. The only thing that Trump can try is to claim that the punishments should be put on hold while he's president.

That's obviously not going to fly.

Will the interest keep accruing while Trump is President, or will it be held in abeyance for the duration?

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Sat Mar 09, 2024 5:02 pm

Will the interest keep accruing while Trump is President, or will it be held in abeyance for the duration?

Why would it be held in abeyance?