Donald Trump is close to the deadline to post bond in his fraud trial—and he’s screwing himself over even more.
After having reached out to several guarantors and 30 suretors for help posting his $464 million New York bank fraud bond, Donald Trump suddenly wants everyone to know he actually does have the cash.
In a bizarre rant on Friday morning, the man who was found to have defrauded banks and investors by overvaluing himself and the value of his properties claimed that he had accrued the wealth by way of “HARD WORK, TALENT, AND LUCK.”
Trump also admitted he has nearly half a billion dollars in cash.
The confession directly contradicts a filing from his legal team last month arguing that it would be “impossible” to secure a bond covering the full amount of the multimillion-dollar ruling.
Trump’s words will surely help out New York Attorney General Letitia James, who on Wednesday urged an appeals court to ignore Donald Trump’s latest effort to worm his way out of paying the $464 million disgorgement from his bank fraud trial.
If he admits he has the money, he is at the very least admitting he lied on record when he said he didn’t. If he admits he doesn’t have the money, he is at the very least publicly admitting he was never as rich as he told his supporters he was - but also admitting that he overvalued the properties, which is lying on record since he said he didn’t overvalue them.
Call me crazy but I think there’s a chance he’s lying.
If he said it out loud, it’s most likely a lie.
Worse, the guy may be demented and delusional; he may actually believe his has the money in cash.
The more I see him talk the more I think he has dementia; worse than biden by far. I’m amazed he gets a free pass on it.
Yeah.
Dementia combined with a complete lack of inhibition results in a presence that is much more compelling to idiots compared to someone who periodically stumbles as they attempt to compensate for their cognitive decline.
I mean, yeah, he “admitted” it… but knowing how much of a pathological liar he is, it’s also possible that he just wanted to look “successful” to his captive rubes.
Either way, he is absolutely creating real and serious problems for himself by saying that. And I love that for him.
If his sheep believe it maybe they’ll stop giving him money though. Bonus.
Can you explain what you mean by the 2nd paragraph? Could that put him in legal trouble for the motion his lawyers filed to the court that claimed it was “impossible” for him to secure enough cash to cover bond?
If he’s saying he has it and he actually has it: he shot himself in the foot, because now the courts will put his finances under a microscope to find it. And they’ll probably find it.
If he’s saying he has it and he doesn’t actually have it: he still shot himself in the foot, because the courts are still gonna put his finances under a microscope, except it will last way longer because they’ll find out he’s actually broke, and also perhaps misrepresented his assets and income outside of the context of the NY civil case, which might yield some new charges involving criminal tax evasion, depending on what they find.
The way I’m reading it (and I could absolutely be wrong here) but it sounds like he might be saying he has the money now thru hard work and tan lotion or whatever the hell. Not that he always had it. That would still cause problems but not nearly as much as if he is saying he always had it. Cause then he basically lied in court under oath which is obviously a no no.
But if he’s saying he like hit the ground and made some shrewd genius business moves to raise the money quickly or something I don’t think that would cause a ton of problems. And I could easily see some moron rich people getting together and just giving him the money or something
It’s that, or he’s getting ready to have the RNC bankroll his financial losses. Which I’m sure will trigger tons of lawsuits from people who are very not ok with that.
This is all just a smokescreen. The objective is to create chaos and confusion. Delays here help trump.
So he’s essentially inviting the state of New York to perform a super mega audit of his finances. Got it.
More or less, yeah. And, depending on what they find, they might tell the IRS that they should have a look, too.
How long until they just admit that he’s senile, but still tell people to vote for him to be the president?
Isn’t that what they’re doing with Biden? If Dems lose this race it’s because they shot themselves in the foot at the start.
Except Biden isn’t senile, he’s just old. And anybody trying to compare his mental state to Trump’s based solely on what we can plainly see on camera, is doing so in bad faith. That’s not counting what the actual transcript of the Special Counsel investigation said, that he has a seemingly photographic memory.
Their comment wasn’t a comparison to Biden but a comparison to the DNC pushing Biden.
No one is happy about how old EITHER of them are.
Quote from Trump on truth social shown in the article:
THE OFTEN OVERTURNED POLITICAL HACK JUDGE ON THE RIGGED AND CORRUPT A.G. CASE
Can they not sue him for libel on this?
Apart from that it’s hilarious that he still tries to claim he is paying for his presidential campaign himself.
Normal people would have been jailed for contempt of court for far less.
Contempt of court only applies to behavior in the courtroom, or when the judge has issued a specific order.
Trump isn’t in the courtroom and was never banned from criticizing the judge or prosecutor, so there is no basis for contempt of court.
Trump isn’t in the courtroom and was never banned from criticizing the judge or prosecutor
Right, because Judge Engoron intentionally left himself and the prosecutor out of his gag order.
Wisely so, because otherwise it would have been overturned. Everyone has a 1st Amendment right to criticize public officials like judges and prosecutors, but staff not so much.
Courts generally consider broad statements like “rigged” and “corrupt” to be opinions, which by themselves are not grounds for libel. Libel requires stating specific false facts.
For example, “The election was rigged” is an opinion. But “Two Georgia election workers threw away GOP ballots” is libel.
Libel requires stating specific false facts
I know what you mean and what you’re intending here but there is no such thing as “false facts.” It’s lies.
The election was rigged" is an opinion.
It is not. It’s a bool statement - true or false. The election was not rigged, that’s a fact. Stating otherwise is a lie.
“Rigged” is an opinion.
I don’t think it was rigged, but people routinely claim that due to the way the Electoral College works, all presidential elections are “rigged” in favor of the GOP. Similar claims have been made of recent Democratic primaries. Or that elections are rigged in favor of wealthy candidates, or incumbents.
Courts aren’t going to decide whether it’s true that something is “rigged”, they need something more concrete.
What about “often overturned”? That seems like a fact that could potentially be proven or disproven.
Especially if the judge has never been overturned, or never/rarely overturned in the context or timeframe of these cases. Assuming that is a false fact for this judge, I don’t know his stats.
Another judge on his cases has been potentially been “often overturned” based on percentages of total cases/rulings?
“Often” is an opinion about something that has happened. Just like “a lot”.
Suppose I said “Boeing aircraft often fail” and you haven’t kept up with the news. You can conclude that they have failed, but you won’t know how many times unless you ask more questions.
What if I say you often get speeding tickets while driving, but you’ve never been stopped by the cops for anything, or you got one speeding ticket 10 years ago? If I keep repeating that you “often get speeding tickets” and it gets you fired - did I not hurt you with a lie?
Notice I’m not accusing you of speeding. I’m saying you often get ticketed, something that can be verified
He’s not accusing the judge of “often making wrong or bad decisions” He is saying “often overturned decisions” Has the judge been overturned in these proceedings? Because another federal judge in one of his other cases has been overturned, but he’s not posting about that judge being unfair or “often overturned”
I feel like there’s a difference, but maybe using “often” murks it up just enough. Like using alleged, “it’s possible”, or “people say” to spread rumors.
If you say I often get speeding tickets, that’s the same as saying that I’ve gotten speeding tickets and you think I’ve gotten too many.
The first part is false only if I’ve never gotten one. The second is an opinion.
I would be surprised if any judge never had any part of any decision changed on appeal. Appeals courts exist to modify what judges do, it just goes with the territory. Engoron is no different this regard, in fact Trump himself was partly successful in appealing one of his orders.
Honestly I don’t believe for a second that he actually has the money. I just don’t think he can handle people (HIS people) knowing that he’s flat fucking broke and at the end of his rope.
Monday we’ll find out if Schrodinger’s cash was in the box or not.He’s not broke. TruthSocial is about to go public via SPAC and make him about $3.3B. Company will trade under ticker DJT.
This is all a nice distraction to rile his base.
He can’t cash that out in time to help with this, and what bail bondsman is going to take shares of a social media company as collateral?
I’ve read he legit does have a bit over $500M liquid, but if he touches more than $450M of what remains, loans will automatically start getting called in.
Loans he can’t pay if he only has $50M liquid left.
That’d be economics 101. Cash sitting idle loses value, so keep it to a minimum.
But we’re not about that. Buahaha, Trump’s such a loser, he doesn’t even have a few million in the back!!1
