Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (2 Viewers)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

Former President D. Trump has been indicted by a New York Grand Jury. There will be much to talk about on this topic because this is just the first step in a lengthy process.
Possibly it is worthy of its own thread here rather than posting about Trump's indictment in already existing threads?
*
This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
*

Manhattan’s DA wanted a Friday Trump arrest. Trump’s team said no.

Secret Service needed more time to prepare, according to the ex-president’s legal team.

www.yahoo.com

 

[FullMonte]

What is truly ridiculous is that they had to have a hearing at all! Cannon could have made this ruling from her chambers and yet, she further entertained more theatrics from trump &co and injected more false equivalencies.

Yeah. I’ve seen a few analysts say that this was actually a bad ruling for the DOJ. Instead of simply denying the motion, the judge implied that she’s going to let a jury made up of regular people determine the constitutionality of this matter, instead of a judge (who went to school for this specific thing) making that ruling.

I’m more concerned that she didn’t rule on the “I deemed these as personal, which the PRA says allows me to keep them” argument. That should have taken about 2 seconds to deny. The PRA was specifically written to prevent that behavior, and it very clearly defines what a presidential record is. There is no mechanism for the president to designate something as personal.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

What is truly ridiculous is that they had to have a hearing at all! Cannon could have made this ruling from her chambers and yet, she further entertained more theatrics from trump &co and injected more false equivalencies.

Could Jack Smith not file a motion to have her removed? I know it will delay things, but the woman has shown a clear bias for Trump on multiple occasions. She's barely hiding it.

 

[DaveXA]

Could Jack Smith not file a motion to have her removed? I know it will delay things, but the woman has shown a clear bias for Trump on multiple occasions. She's barely hiding it.

I mean, things are gonna get delayed regardless, so I don't think a motion to have her removed will ultimately hurt the timeline much. Might as well do it since I think it would be a legitimate request.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Do you think all these cases being delayed could actually help Biden in a way?

I remember a lot of people in 2016 voting for Trump only for the SCOTUS pick

Is it possible that a lot of people will vote for Biden only to make sure Trump is held accountable?

"If these cases are still pending after the election and Trump wins he will just cancel them. If you truly believe no one is above the law, and Trump should be held accountable vote Biden"

 

[FullMonte]

Could Jack Smith not file a motion to have her removed? I know it will delay things, but the woman has shown a clear bias for Trump on multiple occasions. She's barely hiding it.

I’ve seen several people (Farron Cousins and Meidas Touch come to mind) say that Smith is just building a rock solid case to have her removed.

I’ve also seen them point out that Canon is making a lot of paperless orders, and since those aren’t actually rulings on the docket, they can’t be appealed.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Judge Aileen Cannon''s decision to kick the can down the road when it comes to ruling on the constitutionality of prosecuting Donald Trump for obstructing justice when he refused to return sensitive government documents was blasted by one former U.S. attorney who mocked her written justification.

On her Civil Discourse platform, former prosecutor Joyce Vance took aim at Judge Cannon's ruling for its impenetrable legal prose, including sentences such as, "The overall question presented depends too greatly on contested instructional questions about still-fluctuating definitions of statutory terms/phrases as charged, along with at least some disputed factual issues raised in the motion.”

Vance called Cannon's lament about “unconstitutional vagueness” worrisome before taking up the judge's key assertion.

"The Judge’s ruling was virtually incomprehensible, even to those of us who speak 'legal' as our native language. If you tried to write something that was deliberately dumb, this sentence would be it," she argued.

Continuing in that vein, she added, "Trump’s motion didn’t raise any argument that warranted 'serious consideration,' and the court’s determination was made before the 'lengthy oral argument' she heard today, unless she typed her written opinion up on a 15-minute break."..............

MSN

Judge Cannon's 'virtually incomprehensible' ruling appears 'deliberately dumb': expert

Judge Aileen Cannon''s decision to kick the can down the road when it comes to ruling on the constitutionality of prosecuting Donald Trump for obstructing justice when he refused to return sensitive government documents was blasted by one former U.S. attorney who mocked her written...

www.rawstory.com

 

[Optimus Prime]

So what now?
============


CNN) — Former President Donald Trump can’t find an insurance company to underwrite his bond to cover the massive judgment against him in the New York attorney general’s civil fraud case, his lawyers told a New York appeals court.

Trump’s attorneys said he has approached 30 underwriters to back the bond, which is due by the end of this month.

“The amount of the judgment, with interest, exceeds $464 million, and very few bonding companies will consider a bond of anything approaching that magnitude,” Trump’s lawyers wrote. (Trump himself was fined $454 million; the $464 million includes the disgorgement for his adult sons Don Jr. and Eric.)

An insurance broker, Gary Giuletti, who testified for Trump during the civil fraud trial, signed an affidavit stating that securing a bond in the full amount “is a practical impossibility.”…….

Trump is unable to make $464 million bond in civil fraud case, his lawyers tell court | CNN Politics

Former President Donald Trump can’t find an insurance company to underwrite his bond to cover the massive judgment against him in the New York attorney general’s civil fraud case, his lawyers told a New York appeals court.

www.cnn.com

 

[B4YOU]

Typically, you need to provide 10% non-refundable fee for a bond. So after paying his 83M defamation suit, Trump lacks another 46M in cash to cover his 464M bond or underwriters are asking for 20-30% because they don’t trust Trump to pay. Also, personal property could be used to secure a bond. But, if you have just been found guilty of inflating property values, no bond company is going to trust your values.

LOL

 

[Taurus]

Please tell me he can go to jail if he just blows this off.

Green, folding money on the judge's desk by noon or off to jail for contempt. No phone, no rallies, just grey walls and time.

 

[efil4]

Typically, you need to provide 10% non-refundable fee for a bond. So after paying his 83M defamation suit, Trump lacks another 46M in cash to cover his 464M bond or underwriters are asking for 20-30% because they don’t trust Trump to pay. Also, personal property could be used to secure a bond. But, if you have just been found guilty of inflating property values, no bond company is going to trust your values.

LOL

yeah and he cant simply " stiff" the bond company like he would say a subcontractor. The Bonding company would be on the hook for the $464,000,000 and there isnt an underwriter out there willing to sign off on that, regardless of collateral - his financial history of not paying his legal obligations precedes him.

So the insurance expert was right, getting a bond in that amount was "practically impossible"

What he left out was " FOR THAT GUY" in his reasoning.

 

[FullMonte]

Please tell me he can go to jail if he just blows this off.

Green, folding money on the judge's desk by noon or off to jail for contempt. No phone, no rallies, just grey walls and time.

I don’t think so. But if he doesn’t post the bond (or escrow the full amount) by the deadline—I think it’s 30 days—the individual that won the suit against him (in this case, the state of NY) can begin executing the judgement. So, the state can begin seizing his bank accounts and property.

That’s my understanding.

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[UriUT]

Goes against what he claimed in his depo. Makes one wonder, is he full of shirt all the time? (Rhetorical...we all know the answer)

 

[brandon]

Welcome to the United Saudi States of America.

 

[Optimus Prime]

some places won’t let you get a job as a cashier if you have bad credit

 

[MT15]

 

[DaveXA]

That's some hilarity right there.

 

[superchuck500]