Posted on 03/22/2024 7:14:50 AM PDT by bitt
Trump's claim after lawyers said it was 'practical impossibility' to pay full amount
Judge ordered him to pay $454 million as he appeals
Trump lawyers asked to lower amount to $100m
Donald Trump claimed he has half a billion dollars in cash in series of furious posts on Truth Social ahead of the deadline to pay the $454million New York fraud fine.
The former president didn't mention paying the bond and insisted that a 'substantial amount' of the huge haul of money was set aside for his campaign.
He also hinted that New York Attorney General Letitia James and Judge Engoron chose the huge fine to stop him running for president.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
If the money is Trump’s, then it doesn’t matter to the court if he has earmarked it for other uses - the fact that he has it means he can pay the bond, and undermines his request to have the bond lowered on the grounds of irreparable harm. If the money is the campaign’s, then it is irrelevant as to this issue, as I do not believe you can convert campaign funds to personal use. Since the judgment is against Trump and not against the campaign, using campaign funds for this purpose would probably violate campaign finance laws.
If the money is Trump's private money, and if he has it earmarked for his campaign, then the ridiculously high bond requirement just adds to the overwhelming evidence that the prosecution, decision and penalty are all political and malicious in origin and are in various violations of the Constitution.
If the money is the campaign's money and of he is being prosecuted by his campaign opponent for political reason's then he has the ethical right to use that money for any legal expenses.
And as a bonus point I will add, if the NYS superior court is denying any consideration of a stay pending appeal, pending a ridiculously high unconstitutional bond payment requirement, then Trump has every constitutional right to petition SCOTUS.
Exercise a bit of humility and perhaps you’ll learn something about how to influence public opinion for the betterment of mankind.
A bit of humility? But I wanna be just like Trump and post angry insults like he does.
I think you are conflating how you think things should be with how things actually are.
Since Trump was sued for things related to his business and not related to his campaign, it would be probably be illegal for the campaign to pay his legal expenses, even though there is an obvious political motivation to the case.
In order to appeal to SCOTUS, Trump will first have to exhaust his appeals through the NYS appeals courts. It is doubtful SCOTUS would short-circuit the process on a case like this, if it is even possible.
Understand, I agree that this is a political case and the facts of the case and the size of the award make it very likely Trump will get at least some relief if not an outright reversal. Unfortunately, the way the system is structured, that process will take time and money, and there may not be any way to speed up the process.
No conflation. I'm saying what should be based on the Constitution.
Since Trump was sued for things related to his business and not related to his campaign, it would be probably be illegal for the campaign to pay his legal expenses, even though there is an obvious political motivation to the case.
I disagree. If there is proven political motivation, then the expense to fight it is a campaign expense.
In order to appeal to SCOTUS, Trump will first have to exhaust his appeals through the NYS appeals courts. It is doubtful SCOTUS would short-circuit the process on a case like this, if it is even possible.
Hasn't the NYS Court of Appeals already denied consideration for a stay pending appeal without Trump coming up with the absurdly expensive bond?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.