But in this case Trump is the tenant, not the owner. The GSA is the owner.
If he’s only leasing it, how can he sell the hotel if he’s not the legal owner?
I read the situation wrong, but this is still possible.
Trump is running a hotel out of a building the government is leasing to him. He can’t sell the building, because he doesn’t own it. But he can sell the business that is using the hotel. If he does that, then the new owner can take on the lease. Here is an article talking about something like this.
https://exitadviser.com/selling.aspx?id=tips-selling-business-with
When a business is being sold, buyers often associate the real estate as part of the business. But in many cases, the seller does not actually own the commercial building in which they run their business from. They likely have a commercial lease agreement established with the true owner of the building. This means when the business is sold, the seller will need to create a lease assignment which transfers their interest in the commercial lease over to the buyer.
So, it’s not the same scenario I presented before, but it’s similar. Trump sells the hotel (the business, not the building), the new owner takes on the lease, the investigation determines that the lease has been violated based on actions that Trump took, and the lease is terminated. The new owner now owns a hotel business and no building to run it from, which is worthless. Trump again takes his money and runs.
< Light dawns >
Thanks.
One would hope that the mere possibility (likelihood) of the lease being terminated would be sufficient to scuttle any deals currently being negotiated.
Although I suppose that some of the America-hating fuckstick’s creditors would prefer to see a sale go through, to (theoretically) protect their interests.
My favorite line from the ruling.
I am reminded of the blindly malicious black tar entity in Star Trek TNG that ended up killing Tasha Yar. Not a great parallel because she was a good person who died in the line of duty. But your mention of “the swamp” got me thinking of it.
Hmm…
Hey, can we get a trigger alert before we’re suddenly looking at pure chaotic evil? Luckily, my scrolling finger was faster than my gag reflex.
Hmm, can you “Spoiler Blur” a photo?
Yeah but you get a blurred link, not a blurred photo.
How about this
ETA: it doesn’t work
I feel bad for all you decent folk who are looking at Rudy The Leaker while experimenting with Discourse.
I really should’ve tried it myself with a harmless photo (Millard Fillmore, perchance…).
Try this one.
Oh look, it’s picking it’s teeth.
If I were picking my teeth, I’d choose better ones then those.
running_coach, you really should charge Folacin for having provided that straight line.
This headline reminds me of certain bad, bad, bad thread titles in MPSIMS.
Donald Trump’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week in court
“They took their time on this one. You need to be careful and cautious and thorough. You do not want to give your enemies anything to use against you or your client, and you want to have a clear… strong message,” one of the sources said.
<snip>
“It seems somebody dropped the ball, though, doesn’t it?” the person familiar with the situation asked, rhetorically.
That’s what I was thinking. People in a position to buy hotels (either physical buildings or just the business) generally aren’t as stupid as the average MAGA rube.
One certainly hopes not.