They don't expect to get any of that money back. This is literally just a tax write-off for a $100b dollar company. On the other hand, if the appeal gets denied (and it probably will), then all the money will be collected fairly quickly through collections.
Trump and Trumpists take control of RNC
--Patrick
Two days later: ‘Make the RNC White Again’: GOP Ends Minority Outreach Program
Can we claim that any kind of "quiet part" even still exists any more?
--Patrick
This has been the reaction from the majority that I've seen, yes.
New RNC co-chair Lara Trump vows "Every single penny" RNC has will go to Trump
New RNC co-chair Lara Trump vows "Every single penny" RNC has will go to Trump
--Patrick
I'm just sad/scared that Trump will be the Lenin to some other guy's Stalin.
figmentPez
Staff member
Trump used the word "bloodbath" in a speech recently, and now social media is abuzz talking about it.
For once I think it's being taken out of context. Trump was talking about the automobile industry, China building cars in Mexico and then selling them to America with lower taxes than if they were coming from China, or something. He said that if democrats win there will be a bloodbath. If you look up "bloodbath" in the dictionary, you'll see one of it's most common non-literal uses is about the stock market. Trump was very clearly talking about how bad things would be for the automobile industry without him in power.
He's probably lying about some of those details, and he's absolutely wrong about being good for the economy, but there's no reason to suspect that this specific remark was a threat of violence. Trump is an idiot who has no concept of framing or word choice. He rambles and says whatever comes into his head. His dog whistles aren't clever double-meanings.
I don't think he deserves credit for actually having context that could explain his statement. Usually when his follower claim "but you're taking it out of context" there is no context. They cannot explain how what he said wasn't what he actually said, because he's a big dumb-dumb who says the quiet part out loud. It actually makes him look stupider for this to be an unintentionally horrible choice of words, and since being dumb as a sack of wadded up fast food wrappers is typical of Dolt 45, I'm going to assume that the dumbest explanation is the most likely one.
For once I think it's being taken out of context. Trump was talking about the automobile industry, China building cars in Mexico and then selling them to America with lower taxes than if they were coming from China, or something. He said that if democrats win there will be a bloodbath. If you look up "bloodbath" in the dictionary, you'll see one of it's most common non-literal uses is about the stock market. Trump was very clearly talking about how bad things would be for the automobile industry without him in power.
He's probably lying about some of those details, and he's absolutely wrong about being good for the economy, but there's no reason to suspect that this specific remark was a threat of violence. Trump is an idiot who has no concept of framing or word choice. He rambles and says whatever comes into his head. His dog whistles aren't clever double-meanings.
I don't think he deserves credit for actually having context that could explain his statement. Usually when his follower claim "but you're taking it out of context" there is no context. They cannot explain how what he said wasn't what he actually said, because he's a big dumb-dumb who says the quiet part out loud. It actually makes him look stupider for this to be an unintentionally horrible choice of words, and since being dumb as a sack of wadded up fast food wrappers is typical of Dolt 45, I'm going to assume that the dumbest explanation is the most likely one.
"one year from the following thursday" is probably a polite japanese way to say "when it snows in hell".
Whaaaaaat? NOOOOOO! The "Billionaire" can't cover $464 million? The hell you say!
LiQuiDiTY
"the bond insurance guys don't want to take real estate as cover, only stocks and cash"
You don't have that much in stocks? Really? Bad investments ahoy. Always diversify.
So sell some of those properties at a loss. Heck, with his sort of supposed friends I'd imagine he'd have millionaires lining up to buy some of his real estate at decent prices.
... What do you mean half his friends' accounts have been frozen due to Ukraine sanctions ?
You don't have that much in stocks? Really? Bad investments ahoy. Always diversify.
So sell some of those properties at a loss. Heck, with his sort of supposed friends I'd imagine he'd have millionaires lining up to buy some of his real estate at decent prices.
... What do you mean half his friends' accounts have been frozen due to Ukraine sanctions ?
...if there's anyone who doesn't know who Mark Levin is, he is someone who, in this tweet, is unironically expressing genuine outrage that no billionaire is stepping up to do what Mr. Levin no doubt considers their "duty" to help out a fellow...billionaire? Mark has previously gone on record as saying that he thinks the charges against Mr. Trump are bogus and that the Democrats are only trying to oust Trump in order to institute a totalitarian government. I don't know why he is expecting what amounts to charity from billionaires, though. After all, they didn't get to be billionaires through generosity.
--Patrick
They also didn't get to be billionaires by backing bad deals to deadbeats
Pretty sure Ivanka and Jared are pretty loaded. Does the golden child not want to help out her dad?
I find the whole "it's impossible to make this amount of bond, it's witch hunt" ridiculous and disingenuous.
How often has a regular Joe (or José or...) been given a bond of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars which is equally impossible for them to come up with?
Musk or Zuckerberg could come up with $500m easily - plenty of stocks to leverage. So it's not impossible for an actual, you know, billionaire. It's just impossible for him, which is often the case.
How often has a regular Joe (or José or...) been given a bond of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars which is equally impossible for them to come up with?
Musk or Zuckerberg could come up with $500m easily - plenty of stocks to leverage. So it's not impossible for an actual, you know, billionaire. It's just impossible for him, which is often the case.
GasBandit
Staff member
It's very possible for him, he could sell off all his real estate assets and probably make it. But he doesn't want to, so it's impossible. The prosecutors have already pointed out to the judge that while the claim is it is "impossible," he and his lawyers are not providing any documentation or numbers, they just want the judge to take their word for it.
A guide to Project 2025, the extreme right-wing agenda for the next Republican administration
Project 2025, a comprehensive transition plan organized by right-wing think tank The Heritage Foundation to guide the next GOP presidential administration, is the conservative movement’s most robust policy and staffing proposal for a potential second Trump White House — and its extreme agenda...
--Patrick
That seems like pretty great news to me. Pilot that ship the way you do your businesses, Mr. Trump.
I think there are lot of parties who would be interested in having that kind of leverage over a potential president.
Yeah, but would they want to be so overt about it? That's really the question now. The world is learning he's not the "investment" he once was/claimed to be, and people are watching even more carefully where his money is coming from. Granted, he's trying to set up the GOP to be his unquestioning bootlicks, but everyone else he's pissed off isn't going to be so forgiving. ...unless they find a way to profit from it.
I think after the Chubb stockholders revolted against the CEO when they offered him the first bond, it's unlikely any legitimate or semi-legitimate front is going to handle the bond without cash upfront.
I think that's the only reason he's running again.
That and fundraising is it's most successful business ever.