Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trouble! The $175 million bond in former President Trump’s civil fraud trial is at risk after the New York attorney general’s office questioned the qualifications of the California-based company that posted it.
The Hill on Twitter X ^ | April 5, 2024 | The Hill

Posted on 04/05/2024 3:40:07 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: Macho MAGA Man

Article is a lie. Letitia can’t bust the chops of a legitimate bonding company, putting them on trial— without exposing the fact that even the 175 Mill is Constitutionally excessive by definition. This idiot even questioning the company brings out the point that NO one has ever had to bond this much, especially not NY’s grubby “lawfare” that requires this being abused. The appeal will reverse the judgement and the stupid biotch should be glad the amount was reversed, for the amount of interest NY would have to pay back the bonding company plus what they posted 175 mill.

The check will clear Letitia, but YOU will not be cleared—you are one stupid bunny.


21 posted on 04/05/2024 4:26:26 PM PDT by John S Mosby (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

You have no clue as to the legal process and how cases get to the SCOTUS, and why most cases do not.


22 posted on 04/05/2024 4:27:41 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cen-Tejas

Thank you. I have challenged bonds several times in my legal career. SOP.


23 posted on 04/05/2024 4:31:48 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
You have no clue as to the legal process and how cases get to the SCOTUS, and why most cases do not.

No you have no clue about what I know about the legal process and what cases "get to the SCOTUS".

My comment stands.

24 posted on 04/05/2024 4:58:19 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Macho MAGA Man

Hire MS-13 to sort out the lawless POS Lucrezia in New Jerk state.


25 posted on 04/05/2024 5:03:12 PM PDT by kiryandil (what Ukrainian electrical grid doink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
how cases get to the SCOTUS, and why most cases do not

"In fact, the Court accepts 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year. Typically, the Court hears cases that have been decided in either an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state (if the state court decided a Constitutional issue)."

I always kind of roll my eyes when people start talking about "taking it to the Supreme Fart".

"On average, the Court considers about 7,000 ‐ 8,000 petitions each term and accepts about 80 for oral argument."

26 posted on 04/05/2024 5:09:21 PM PDT by kiryandil (what Ukrainian electrical grid doink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mathews

The state represents and acts on behalf of “The People” who are the plaintiff in this case. Any disgorgement will go to “The People” who are the collective victims of the acts claimed in court.

Not saying it’s right, but it is how the law works in NY and elsewhere.


27 posted on 04/05/2024 6:43:51 PM PDT by Bob Wills is still the king (Just a Texas Playboy at heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cen-Tejas

That’s the same reason the court appointed monitors inside the Trump Organization are watching for any movement of funds.


28 posted on 04/05/2024 6:46:08 PM PDT by Bob Wills is still the king (Just a Texas Playboy at heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bob Wills is still the king

Trump is like the Energizer Bunny. Most ppl would have dropped out of the race last yr. Thank goodness he didn’t.


29 posted on 04/05/2024 7:05:39 PM PDT by Prince of Space (Trump 2024!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

It’s because our nation is captured by a crime syndicate.

When you can’t get justice from the Department of Justice, you have to go outside the system.

The military is the only way.


30 posted on 04/05/2024 7:37:52 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (What are the personal implications if the Resurrection of Christ is a true event in history?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mathews

They weren’t. That’s the whole issue. You nailed it.

But, in the almost zero chance a court would turn the bond over to them, they (New York State and associated criminals) would be the “beneficiary” of the bond funds.


31 posted on 04/05/2024 8:40:28 PM PDT by Cen-Tejas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: George from New England

Find the fani crap in her closet


32 posted on 04/06/2024 3:25:59 AM PDT by ronnie raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil
I always kind of roll my eyes when people start talking about "taking it to the Supreme Fart".

Even if the SCOTUS wants to hear this case, it lacks constitutional and statutory authority to accept an appeal directly from a trial level state court, when, under state law, an aggrieved party has a right to appellate review through the state court system.

If Judge Numb-Nuts rejects President Trump's bond, then Trump has an absolute right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, First Department, which is an intermediate appellate court. If this court sustains the lower court decision, then Trump can move for permission to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals, which is NY's highest court. If the motion is denied, then Trump can petition the SCOTUS for a writ of certiorari, and if the motion is granted, then he cannot seek review in the SCOTUS until the New York Court of Appeals decides the case.

Again, even if all nine justices want to review the decision from a low level state court trial judge, it does not have the constitutional or statutory authority to do so.

33 posted on 04/06/2024 6:13:12 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
No you have no clue about what I know about the legal process and what cases "get to the SCOTUS".

My comment stands.

I can't fix stupid. (If you want to educate yourself on the legal process, see Post Nos. 26 and 33.)

34 posted on 04/06/2024 6:15:57 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos; kiryandil
I'm well aware of the full process "genius". On other threads I've cited both the statute and Article III Section II.

The statement, "take it to SCOTUS" was meant to convey the idea that all this corrupt nonsense we see now can't stop an eventual petition to SCOTUS. There was at least one "genius" lawyer on this board and there are others who had to be corrected on that fact on several previous threads.

Don't be an a$$.

35 posted on 04/06/2024 8:11:07 AM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson