Trump can’t secure $454 million appeal bond in New York fraud case, his lawyers say

Nothing stopped him in that case. The courts would likely stop him in this case. That's the difference.

 

Philip Morris + RJ Reynolds were hit with $206 Billion.

Remember, the Trump + Trump Corporation $350 Million (plus continuing interest) was NOT A PENALTY.

It was clawing back ill gotten gains + a standard interest assigned for cases of possessing ill gotten gains. You don't get to profit from what you grift.

Had the grift been less, there would have been less to claw back.

 

You meant $350M, right? That was the original number reported. The rest is ever growing interest, the cost of a bond, rounding by the press, etc.


My bet is that Trump Tower is mortgaged or is held in collateral for loans. The real estate business mortgages what they own in order to have the cash to buy other properties, which they then also mortgage. Like apartment building owners all across America, renters are charged enough to cover the mortgage payment, property taxes, maintenance, etc.

In other words, what Trump would get from selling the building, even if he got full price, may not even be a positive dollar amount, given his business practices.

 

Well, I think that was a confusing analogy.

Trump absolutely DID use the money he grifted in order to grow his personal and corporate wealth through their business. They didn't put the amount they grifted in a safety deposit box.

 

I reckon I have a better grasp of it than some here. And, NO-ONE is exempt from the application of the Law, unless that Law states they are exempt from it.

 

No Trump cheated in understating his real estate worth

So he didn't pay taxes on its True value

 

It's a penalty, all court awards are penalties. The law doesn't care whether you were a good boy or not. The law only cares about whether or not it's a sanction. And since it very obviously is a SANCTION(and since SCOTUS declared it a sanction), then yes it's a sanction.

 

In New York, if you make money by persistently committing fraud, you owe the ill-gotten portion back to the state. In this case, Judge Engoron determined that Donald Trump made over $350 million more than he should have if he'd been honest and when you add in interest, you get to $454 million. So it's not a number pulled out of Engrons A$$, its a defined number that was calculated by law

But I think the one thing getting glossed over here is that Trump has claimed to be worth "billions", and yet he cant even secure a bond with all of his other "properties" combined for $500m. This is proving that Trump has been lying all along, and the minions refuse to accept that his entire persona is just a lie.

 

I don't see that as defending any point you have made on this topic.

Clawing back ill gotten gains can be called a penalty or a sanction.

Remember that the penalty in this case included a monetary amount specified as a claw back of ill gotten gains.

AND, it includes a ruling that Trump and family can not do business in New York anymore.

I would say that part of the ruling is a sanction.

 

While we talk about speculative gains, let's talk about speculating that it was "350 million more than he should have". First of all, it's a rather novel approach by the Court to try and bring Trump to what it presumes the financial state of Trump would have been. Secondly, as I pointed out and especially with what we now know, I think NY will be very disappointed with what it got.

Inflated assets are just that: inflated. And in this case, by perception and not reality. Basically, even when the state owns this by collateral now the State owes this 350 million dollar debt that no one's going to be able to pay off(or want to, for that matter)

I would argue the most valuable real-estate Trump has at this point is his Scotland golf courses, but good luck as that's foreign real estate. You could liquidate his entire US holdings, but because of the damage to the Trump brand, the financial damage to them is irrepairable.

So because the Court went with this novel approach, NY will have a 350 million dollar hole that it otherwise did not have before.

And for Trump, in the unlikely event he escapes incarceration this is actually good for him long-term. The state of NY, has by virtue of what we know now basically liquidated all of his debt. He can now start over. Albeit not in NY, but he doesn't need NY anymore. If people still buy the Trump Brand, he can succeed in investing in Florida and elsewhere.

He'll still be viewed as a major financial risk, maybe even more of one than before but if he plays his cards right he can still exist in a high-risk market.

 

Trump faces legal action in Scotland over his actions wre the golf course. Plus, the idea that someone would pay significant money for that boondoggle is somewhat hard to believe.

Clawing back ill gotten gains is not novel.

NY always had the ramifications of Trump and Co.'s grift. And, it is plugging that hole so it doesn't get larger and, hopefully, it won't spread to other would be grifters.

So, you celebrate the success of his criminal behavior.

There are court appointed monitors of his personal and business moves. I'm sure he's trying to hide his wealth.

 

The left has a very weird definition of 'celebrate'. I'm not celebrating anything, I'm overlooking the situation as I see it. And yes, this "clawing back ill gotten gains" is novel. It acts as though the financial markets is correctable by the legal system(so much for free enterprise!) when in reality, the government takes on a self-created liability that didn't exist(or at least, would have solely been Trump's, or Trump's children).

But nope, now the entire state of NY owns that collateral debt, and it'll most likely have to raise NY state taxes to make up the deficit(what was that about protecting the financial markets Mr. Engorgan?)

In 10 years, this boondoggle could possibly turn NY into a purple state politically.

 

No, the vast majority of it is disgorgement. You can look that term up yourself.

 

I strongly disagree that NY is better off financially if it allows grifting on the scale of Trump and his organization.

 

I did, I even linked to a SCOTUS opinion. It's a penalty. You can call it 'disgorgement', you can call it whatever you want but when a State imposes a sanction, it's a penalty.

I mean, you're a lawyer you should know this.

 

That 'grifting' would have been exposed and it would have been Trump who would've owned the negative assets. Now the State does. This isn't about Trump, this is about economics and how it works. 10 years from now, whenever whatever new taxes throttle NY, at a minimum the AG will lose her next election.

So much winning, that the state of NY is even more bankrupt but hey they stuck it to him!

 

Disgorgement isn't something separate.

 

Whoever said it was? It doesn't need to be, to be identified as a penalty imposed by the court due to the defendant's fraudulent actions.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/disgorgement.asp

Obviously since SCOTUS had to clarify, it's not the first time this question has come up, but it's a silly question.

When in doubt, ask yourself: Does the defendant have an option? If he doesn't, full stop, it's a sanction.

 

Who should they have "stuck it to" other than the grifters?

"Owned the negative assets" - yes, he owes. And, he can't seem to pay - contrary to all his years of claiming fabulous wealth (punctuated by bankruptcy, of course).

 

Do bank robbers have options?

Where are you going with your terminology arguments?

Whatever you want to call it, Trump owes. And, he's banned from doing business in NY. And, there is monitoring of his books that will continue.

 

That's not the point. So okay, I know the left doesn't believe this in general but the financial markets have a way of correcting themselves and punishing sleezy businesses and actors in ways that the court could not. Like I said, Trump gets to liquidate his NY Assets and say goodbye to NY.

NY, in its victory(a mulitated victory), now owns 350M worth of debt. Because it only meant anything under the Trump name branding. Well now that brand no longer exists.

If the State didn't do this, and Trump's earnings were exposed, maybe it comes out that he's late on his bank loans. Maybe people stop lending him money. Etc. All of the inflated value and debt would have fell on him as an individual.

Now it falls on NY. In many ways, this is a Trump bailout with stipulations lol.

 

As I just posted, this isn't really the W that you think it is. For example, they can only monitor his books in NY...but they just banned him from NY(lol.) So essentially, it's both toothless AND another expense on NY.

Because all you see is 'punishing Trump', you don't understand how hare-brained this ruling is. It stifles the speculative markets in NY, for the foreseeable future. The liquidation for Trump is a blessing, provided he's not incarcerated. 350 million in liabilities, gone.

Oh and speaking of his potential incarceration that would make it even harder for the State to recoup.

Putting a really big number on things might "show him", but even investopedia pointed out how destructive this idea really is financially.

NY was already in the red before it took on 350M in liabilities.

 

Why do you keep claiming they took on 350 million in liabilities? You can’t a debt with your debt….doesn't work thar way lol

 

Yes, enforcement of laws stifles illegal activity. But, why would NY believe that it's best if they allow illegal activity of this phenomenal magnitude? If it's good, maybe they should encourage it??

How about a tiny bit of law and order? Is that out of line?

Nobody "put" a really big number on him. They measured his grift as best they could. They would do the same if instead of these crimes, Trump had robbed a bank. They would measure the size of the theft and demand it back.

 

I haven't suggested incarceration in this case.

I certainly don't believe that government profit should be the deciding factor in whether the law is upheld.

If the law says jail, then it's jail.

Why are you trying so hard to free Trump from accountability? Do you believe he and his company are above the law? Or, what?