I’m sorry FFolks, but that is not a real Bond.
Golf clap.
Further falls in Truth social network stock, and Predicted value of it ending as a $2 stock which values it roughly as $150m for Trumps ownership, so wouldn’t even cover the lower bond in that case…
While I wouldn’t call this anything new, it is a pretty good summary of the state of play in Trump’s surety bond. A few experts also read the tea leaves about what they think could, and may, happen at the 4/22 bond hearing:
I still haven’t really seen anybody outside of the MAGA camp come to the defense of this ‘bond’ or formally, coherently, and substantively explain why it is legally sufficient.
Just … crickets … wearing red hats, and wearing them ironically.
Given the inevitability of the fall, one wonders if Bloomberg put Trump on the billionaires list just so they could have the pleasure of taking him off again.
I find that extremely improbable. I mean, there’s no history whatsoever of anybody at Bloomberg ever trying to hit at DJT’s most well-publicized vulnerability – the money shot.
Oh. Wait.
I used to think this was an apocryphal tale, but … video (about 32s in).
FTR, the January $2.50 put options are now offered at $0.37. Which means that the market is willing to bet 37 cents for the opportunity tp make $2.13 if the stock goes to zero by January 2025.
Oh, and by the way … the open interest and volume on those puts far exceeds any other Jan puts. IOW it’s a popular bet.
For the next time Trump starts whining about how difficult it is to get a bond:
From the article:
I wonder if she tried calling the prosecution a witch hunt or said the judge was deranged?
Gotta love that British understatement.
The bond plot thickens. It starts to look more and more as though Trump’s appeal bond is the equivalent of a post-dated, other-country, third-party, bad check.
Knight’s parent company – the one they assure us all is “good for it --” is chartered in the Cayman Islands, a well known tax haven:
A hearing on the matter is scheduled for April 22.
Oh. I’d bet on it 
I’m still curious about all this. Is the part of this ‘bond’ that makes it not really a bond something that would have been caught or did someone just happen to catch it? Like, if instead of “Donald Trump” it said “Mike Pence” they’d catch that right away, but this “Trump will pay you if he loses” clause seems like it was buried and if they did that hoping someone would assume it just a standard boilerplate bond, it would go unnoticed.
I keep wondering if they assumed it wouldn’t get caught and they would just deal with the fallout at the end of the appeal or if they knew it would be caught and were hoping for a delay while it gets sorted out.
ISTM either way is just as likely.
One thing I know for sure: Fucking around with a judge on a matter as serious as this is going to garner a highly unwanted result. I will be surprised if Judge Engoron – whose patience has already been severely tried in this case – does anything other than permit AG James to commence collection efforts forthwith.
IANAL, but …
These organizations (eg, the AGs office) are large and bureaucratic. It would not be my guess that Trump’s lead counsel hands the Bond to Letitia James who then crosses the street to Dean & Deluca and looks it over while enjoying a ristretto.
So, it goes into the process and moves through the departments, eventually getting to some attorney/compliance officer-type whose job it is to vet it.
Which may take a minute.
But I would liken it to finding out that the car you bought at auction isn’t what it was represented as being. You may figure it out on your way home, but you may trailer it, and not figure it out until you tear into the car and evaluate the documentation.
I think it’s a bit like this whole case: did some of the banks shortcut the standard due diligence to make some money? Maybe. But that didn’t exculpate Trump’s liability for Fraud.
And I agree with @Aspenglow : if this truly IS a bogus Bond, and if there’s even a hint of intent to deceive (vs. sheer, overwhelming stupidity and ineptitude), I don’t think the Ranger’s gonna’ like this, Yogi.
Thanks for confirming my reaction. As the details became public, and if it is at it looks, I was stunned by the arrogance. I don’t have your experience, but this seemed destined to hit a brick wall in the form of an irate judge.
IANAL, but “don’t piss off the judge” seems like a wise policy, one Trump ignores. “Don’t commit fraud in defiance of the court’s intentions” seems even more prudent.
I suggest “Don’t commit fraud again while appealing your fraud case” should be on the list too.
I really really hate the “But what if he didn’t” answer to any and all suggestions of MAGA/Trump criminality, but so far I haven’t really seen Trump suffer any repercussions for any of his crimin.’ So what if he pisses off the judge?
My uneducated opinion? The judge sends him a crystal clear message, one that makes clear his displeasure. I think @Aspenglow said at a minimum, he might say that the asset grab can commence. I think he has lots of tools in his toolbox.
In addition to the company not being registered to do bond business in NY, and the lack of a financial statement from the bond company, and the fact it’s registered in the Caymans (which would make collection from the company problematic), it seems to me that this is a classic shell game:
- Large company has a small subsidiary company.
- Small subsidiary company enters into a contract/business deal
- Large company brags about how big they are, and how much money they have
- Deal goes sideways
- Small subsidiary company goes bankrupt because they had limited assets
- Large company goes off scott free and forms a brand new subsidiary company
- Lawsuits ensue, but it takes forever to untangle the mess
Once again, it could be as simple as Trump makes demands, his lawyers know better, but they go along anyway because they’re in too deep to back out.
Trump is used to ROFLstomping people weaker, less wealthy, and less lawyered up than he is. Sure, he should have learned better by now that the government has a lot more people, lawyers, and time to check for his BS, but Trump doesn’t seem to learn (see being hit multiple times for defaming the same person).
Each time, he tries the same thing. Personally, I’d like to see our Judge not only allow the collection to begin immediately due to improper bond, but once again sanction Trump’s lawyers who should have known better. They are responsible for following NY guidelines even if Trump can’t be bothered. And if they make the usual claims that they weren’t involved, didn’t know, or were ignorant, that’s another thing does not pass muster for anyone who has accepted Trump as a client. They’re free to sue Trump for misleading them and causing them to be under discipline.