A Deeply Fractured US

[brihard]

I suspect there is more going here.

Haley might be holding on in some vain hope but I think it’s more than that.

The RNC is apparently fast tracking some internal rules before Trump becomes the nominee. Something to do with not covering his legal fees outside of anything involving his run for presidency.

RNC member floats draft resolutions to bar committee from paying Trump’s legal bills

A member of the Republican National Committee (RNC) floated two draft resolutions Saturday that would bar the committee from paying former President Trump’s mounting legal fees and ensure it …

thehill.com

It could be that reason why she is staying on and being encouraged by some quarters to do so.

He's trying to position his daughter in law Lara Trump to become co-chair of the Republican National Committee. She's outright stated that her loyalty is to her father in law (versus the party or the country), and that she intends to use the RNC as a mechanism to fund his legal expenses. I could see the party establishment being concerned about a de facto dynastic takeover of one of their primary fundraising vehicles. I think we're going to see some serious infighting here.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Now I know what you are talking about, but the post merely expresses the total amount of the judgement owed including interest. See here:



Pre and post judgement interest is a normal part of the laws which govern trials in most jurisdictions. They are part of the judicial order and not the result of some whim of the AG. The court decides what the basic judgement is, the appropriate rate and pre-judgement rate is calculated and added to the basic amount and then the total judgement is entered. Thereafter the total judgement bears interest at the prescribed rate. There are formulas as to the interest rate and how the interest is to be calculated. I'm not an expert on New York State but a cursory examination tells me the rate there is 9% per annum as stated in the article.

There's nothing to see here folks. Move on.

Nothing like a state AG gloating.

Wondered what kind of excuses might be offered up.

 

[quadrapiper]

He's trying to position his daughter in law Lara Trump to become co-chair of the Republican National Committee. She's outright stated that her loyalty is to her father in law (versus the party or the country), and that she intends to use the RNC as a mechanism to fund his legal expenses. I could see the party establishment being concerned about a de facto dynastic takeover of one of their primary fundraising vehicles. I think we're going to see some serious infighting here.

The GOP being looted like a failed casino would look good on them.

Nothing like a state AG gloating.

Wondered what kind of excuses might be offered up.

They are elected, mostly, so that sort of tackiness seems par for the course.

 

[The Bread Guy]

He's trying to position his daughter in law Lara Trump to become co-chair of the Republican National Committee. She's outright stated that her loyalty is to her father in law (versus the party or the country), and that she intends to use the RNC as a mechanism to fund his legal expenses ...

Some say that's one of the reasons Haley's hanging on as long as possible - to keep the yellow from happening.

 

[Brad Sallows]

They are elected, mostly, so that sort of tackiness seems par for the course.

Gloating on social media suggests personal or political motivations, either of which is corruption, not tackiness.

 

[Kirkhill]

Gloating on social media suggests personal or political motivations, either of which is corruption, not tackiness.

Why speculate?

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/01/03/letitia-james-donald-trump-jones-dnt-lead-vpx.cnn

She was elected "vowing" to get Trump.

Job #1.

 

[quadrapiper]

Gloating on social media suggests personal or political motivations, either of which is corruption, not tackiness.

Not sure how an elected official making political noises is corruption.

 

[Kirkhill]

Not sure how an elected official making political noises is corruption.

Sometimes the legal thing and the ethical thing are not the same.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Not sure how an elected official making political noises is corruption.

She's an elected AG, but she's an AG. The ethics of practicing law override the ethics permitted (or not) of politics. Why is it necessary for me to even point this out?

 

[FJAG]

Why is it necessary for me to even point this out?

It's not necrssary. We all agree with you that an AG has to follow legal ethics.

The problem here is that some see the prosecution of a law breaker as the persecution of an innocent man. Some take offence at any action that they interpret as "pilling on" against an innocent man as a sign of corruption. We don't even see it as "piling on" but simply the actions that any AG would take when a conviction is secured.

Trump has been found guilty. Take that as a given for the time being and let the legal, including appeal, processes play out. We'll all see where it goes together.

 

[Brad Sallows]

It's not necrssary. We all agree with you that an AG has to follow legal ethics.

The problem here is that some see the prosecution of a law breaker as the persecution of an innocent man. Some take offence at any action that they interpret as "pilling on" against an innocent man as a sign of corruption. We don't even see it as "piling on" but simply the actions that any AG would take when a conviction is secured.

Trump has been found guilty. Take that as a given for the time being and let the legal, including appeal, processes play out. We'll all see where it goes together.

I've been very specific about "the action". It stands by itself; trying to dress it up as a strawman by pretending it's just like a bunch of other actions is vacuous.

I suppose if AG Barr had tweeted "TLDR; No Collusion" the day Mueller's report was released all the people here who had the vapours over Barr's written summary would have just taken it in stride as "simply the actions that any AG would take".

 

[Fishbone Jones]

He's trying to position his daughter in law Lara Trump to become co-chair of the Republican National Committee. She's outright stated that her loyalty is to her father in law (versus the party or the country), and that she intends to use the RNC as a mechanism to fund his legal expenses. I could see the party establishment being concerned about a de facto dynastic takeover of one of their primary fundraising vehicles. I think we're going to see some serious infighting here.

Can you point me to where you read this?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Trump has 30 days to post bond either himself, or through a third party. That stays all accruals until the appeals is heard.

 

[Remius]

Can you point me to where you read this?

I posted this above.

RNC member floats draft resolutions to bar committee from paying Trump’s legal bills

A member of the Republican National Committee (RNC) floated two draft resolutions Saturday that would bar the committee from paying former President Trump’s mounting legal fees and ensure it …

thehill.com

And a few more from some basic searches

Lara Trump says she thinks GOP voters would like to see RNC pay Donald Trump's legal fees

Donald Trump’s daughter-in-law said she thought the idea would get broad support among GOP voters who see his legal cases as political persecution.

apnews.com

https://twitter.com/x/status/1760652741876080783

 

[brihard]

Can you point me to where you read this?

Her loyalty to Trump can be found quoted here: Lara Trump says she thinks GOP voters would like to see RNC pay Donald Trump's legal fees

Regarding using the RNC to pay legal expenses, I apologize- I said she ‘intends’ to, and that’s a little bit stronger than I can back with a quote. Several of the articles shared say she’s open to the idea and quote her as saying she believes Republican voters want or would be interested in that, but on review I can’t take it so far as to say she’s concretely stated intent, so that’s on me. I think it would be true to form for Trump to try to find ways to achieve this, though. He’s already leveraging PACs to pay legal expenses.

Trump has 30 days to post bond either himself, or through a third party. That stays all accruals until the appeals is heard.

My understanding is it stays enforcement; e.g., asset seizures to collect. I don’t believe it stays the accrual of interest on the judgments. Given how appeals can take years, I don’t think the system is set up to reward legal wrangling as a way to reduce financial obligations via delay. I haven’t followed the civil stuff particularly closely though so I may be wrong.

 

[Kirkhill]

It's not necrssary. We all agree with you that an AG has to follow legal ethics.

The problem here is that some see the prosecution of a law breaker as the persecution of an innocent man. Some take offence at any action that they interpret as "pilling on" against an innocent man as a sign of corruption. We don't even see it as "piling on" but simply the actions that any AG would take when a conviction is secured.

Trump has been found guilty. Take that as a given for the time being and let the legal, including appeal, processes play out. We'll all see where it goes together.

And thus the rationale for a jury of peers.

A pox on your Justinian Tribunals.

 

[brihard]

And thus the rationale for a jury of peers.

A pox on your Justinian Tribunals.

Assuming your lawyer isn’t a doofus who literally fails to tick the “jury trial” box.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

$18 million wouldn't buy a parking lot next to Mar-a-Lago. That is a fact. The judge used a tax return based on net operating sales of the club. A practice the county defends and uses and admits the assessment is not based on property valuation. Not a bank or real estate company, experts in the field, agrees with the biased judges valuation. He is no expert on real estate and it shows with his amateur valuation.

'Breathtaking' Mar-a-Lago worth 'over $1 billion,' defense witness tells Trump fraud trial

Trump is accused of deceiving lenders by giving them statements that greatly overstated the values of some of his assets, including Mar-a-Lago

nationalpost.com

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/03/business/trump-fraud-judge-mar-a-lago/index.html

A fraud case where nobody was defrauded and nobody suffered financial loss. A case where real experts in real estate and banking side with and defend Trump. A biased, glory hunting judge who decides guilt before the defendent even appears in court. A vexatious AG whose whole election campaign was 'get Trump.'

 

[brihard]

$18 million wouldn't buy a parking lot next to Mar-a-Lago. That is a fact. The judge used a tax return based on net operating sales of the club. A practice the county defends and uses and admits the assessment is not based on property valuation. Not a bank or real estate company, experts in the field, agrees with the biased judges valuation. He is no expert on real estate and it shows with his amateur valuation.

'Breathtaking' Mar-a-Lago worth 'over $1 billion,' defense witness tells Trump fraud trial

Trump is accused of deceiving lenders by giving them statements that greatly overstated the values of some of his assets, including Mar-a-Lago

nationalpost.com

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/03/business/trump-fraud-judge-mar-a-lago/index.html

A fraud case where nobody was defrauded and nobody suffered financial loss. A case where real experts in real estate and banking side with and defend Trump. A biased, glory hunting judge who decides guilt before the defendent even appears in court. A vexatious AG whose whole election campaign was 'get Trump.'

I’m sure we’ll see it all shake out over the next six or eight years of appeals.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Her loyalty to Trump can be found quoted here: Lara Trump says she thinks GOP voters would like to see RNC pay Donald Trump's legal fees

Regarding using the RNC to pay legal expenses, I apologize- I said she ‘intends’ to, and that’s a little bit stronger than I can back with a quote. Several of the articles shared say she’s open to the idea and quote her as saying she believes Republican voters want or would be interested in that, but on review I can’t take it so far as to say she’s concretely stated intent, so that’s on me. I think it would be true to form for Trump to try to find ways to achieve this, though. He’s already leveraging PACs to pay legal expenses.




My understanding is it stays enforcement; e.g., asset seizures to collect. I don’t believe it stays the accrual of interest on the judgments. Given how appeals can take years, I don’t think the system is set up to reward legal wrangling as a way to reduce financial obligations via delay. I haven’t followed the civil stuff particularly closely though so I may be wrong.

So your whole post was predicated on people floating ideas and wishful thinking on your part?

Some top Republicans have been talking about getting rid of the RNC chairman for at least 6 months. They aren't happy the way she works with McConnell pulling her strings. Naturally people are being looked at as replacement, with some openly talking about taking a run at it. This isn't a sole conspiracy by Trump.