857
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 206 points 9 months ago

Oh and important fact:

The judge stipulated that the fines CANNOT BE PAID VIA CAMPAIGN FUNDS.

Fat Ass can't run to his useful idiots. It has to be paid via assets and company funds.

#FIRE SALE FRIDAY!

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 88 points 9 months ago

But it can be paid by a PAC.

So basically the same thing.

[-] MammyWhammy@lemmy.ml 52 points 9 months ago

His entire campaign raised ~$330M in 2016 election cycle. At the very least it's a massive hit to the funds they have to spend.

[-] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 30 points 9 months ago

He's going to try to stiff the court. I'd bet money on it. He's going to hide behind his lawyers and try to claim the law doesn't apply the same way to an ex president. Just to delay long enough for the election.

The real test of our democracy will be whether or not they just arrest him when he tries that.

[-] Natanael@slrpnk.net 36 points 9 months ago

Not possible in this case, unless appeals court stays judgement then he's only got 30 days from now to pay up, or else the government can start seizing assets.

There's already a ban on transferring assets, and his businesses will have a court appointed monitor who will have the authority to review ALL payments the company makes. Also he can't cover the payment with loans from any bank or other financial institution registered in New York, which is most of them, lmao

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 months ago

In order to appeal he has to put 110% of the amount owing in escrow.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 5 points 9 months ago

Who gets to start seizing property first? The State of New York or E Jean Carroll?

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago

I assume Carroll, as her judgements deadline to pay will come sooner.

[-] Ullallulloo@civilloquy.com 26 points 9 months ago

Uh, I don't think New York law provides for debtors' prisons anymore. Those went out of style in the 1700s.

The way a court actually handles an unpaid judgment is it just orders the seizure of any property the debtor does own. It doesn't need permission.

[-] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee 11 points 9 months ago

That's fair. It'd be more than the court has done so far

[-] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

Worth pointing out that there's interest on it until it's paid. Currently NY interest on judgements is 9%.

[-] hglman@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

At what point do they take assets?

[-] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

No clue, but the interest will pile up until they do

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago

Presumably after the deadline stated in the order.

[-] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago

DeSantis has previously stated he won't extradite the Cheeto to NY. So in event of arrest warrant he'd just stay away from NY like he already does or til he is president and he isn't able to be arrested over that.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 7 points 9 months ago

So they seize the assets of his companies in NY and he can never do business there again. I'm sure they'd see this as an absolute win.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago

He can crash on Ronda's couch when they seize Mar-a-Lago

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago

He's going to try to stiff the court.

If he does, they can seize assets.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago

But does that count as actual campaign funds or campaign funds + PAC money? Because the latter is the issue. PAC money can be spent however the PAC wants on whatever the PAC wants and PACs can also be funded with donations of any size (and by anyone from any country). Thanks, SCOTUS.

[-] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 23 points 9 months ago

That's like four trillion rubles.

[-] RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

He has a leadership PAC. That is where you put the explicit bribes.

He can direct the money to pay his legal bills.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

This whole thing seems like what would be a slap on the wrist for those of us who aren't fabulously wealthy and powerful.

[-] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago

With as much as his name is in the headlines, he may not have to spend as much.

His base seems willing to prove the old adage "I don't care what they say about me in the papers, as long as they spell my name right ".

[-] stoly@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

Aren't they broke now? He already spent it on legal fees up to this point.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

I mean, that's what Trump's financial paperwork says, so we really have absolutely no idea

[-] orbitz@lemmy.ca 10 points 9 months ago

I think the financial monitor was added on for three years too, so they got people watching, hopefully.

[-] stoly@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

I mean the PACs that people were donating to instead of the GOP, didn't something like $40,000,000 go to pay lawyers and such for Trump?

[-] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 41 points 9 months ago

I would rather he pay with campaign funds. I don't care how rich he is, I want him to fail in the 2024 election.

this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
857 points (98.6% liked)

News

23369 readers
3366 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS