this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2023
362 points (98.1% liked)

politics

25045 readers
2344 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Trump Organization is trying to determine the sweep of Tuesday’s ruling that Donald Trump is liable for fraud and what it means for the future of the former president’s namesake business, his attorneys say.

At a pre-trial hearing Wednesday, Trump attorneys said they didn’t know to which part of the company the ruling applied and were starting to work out what may need to be dissolved to comply with the judge’s surprise decision.

Officials from New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office also said they needed more time to go through the order.

The fraud case “changed significantly since yesterday,” New York Judge Arthur Engoron said in court Wednesday, referring to his stunning ruling where he found Trump and his adult sons liable for fraud and canceled the Trump Organization’s business certification.

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 54 points 2 years ago (2 children)

At best, The Trump Organization gets pulled into little, tiny pieces that are unable to work together. There won't be anything left of value, power or influence.

Bought time we hit him in the money. Kicked him in the fork so hard he suddenly went deaf.

And if it needs saying, money is the only thing propping this man up. His influence will evaporate overnight once he's truly broke.

[–] [email protected] 65 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Don't underestimate the ability of stupid people to give him money. I suspect that he makes more from the grifting than the company. Losing the company martyrdom will be a boon for fundraising.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 years ago

You're right, but the Org is also almost certainly a huge part of how he launders campaign money to pay off his ... Russian bankers.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago

He's over 1 billion in debt. He didn't even fundraise that much after the election and he had other expenses to cover.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

Don't underestimate the ability of Saudi Arabia to give him money.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

This guy made so much money when the first charge was levied that it made my eyes water. People who can't afford rent are dying to bail him out. It's so stupid.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Don’t underestimate the ability of foreign influences to fund him either.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Unfortunately, the grift will continue. Close enough to half the people of the US voted for him last time.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 years ago

46% or 74M voters voted for him. Only 29% of 258M US adults voted for him. This same delusional 30% shows up all the time and they vote hard. They aren't 50% though.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

close to half of the people in the US voted for him

This is legitimately enough to say “pack it in.” The american experiment has failed and failed fucking fantastically.

Edit: guys I get it, it’s not half of the country. It IS roughly half of the people who voted though, which is what fucking matters

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Would be if it was a true measure but with the low voter participation and him getting less than 50% of what few people voted, he never got more than 21% of the total population to vote for him. That means that over three quarters of Americans have never voted for him and probably never will.

That he got that far with so little of the population voting for him (18% when he "won" in 2016) says a LOT about how undemocratic the system is, though..

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Whatever way you do the figures, he was elected once and nearly elected a second time. He’s the most likely candidate for a third term and it’s neck and neck. People choosing not to vote is just as big a problem when one of the candidates is this terrible for the world.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

He was APPOINTED once. Elected is when you get more votes than the other candidates.

People choosing not to vote

You mean politicians from both parties alienating prospective voters by representing rich people and their corporations many times more than regular people, being staunchly pro-cop and laughing at the very notion of common sense policies that most of the population wants?

While Biden is by far the lesser evil, him and the other neoliberals are still very much an evil, complicit in the rise of fascists like Trump because they never do enough to resist them or represent and help the poor people who have been fooled by Trump pretending to care about them.

And that's not even mentioning all the voter suppression the Dems make pretty speeches against but hardly ever do anything to actually stop it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

An indirect election is a type of election. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election

Voter suppression is certainly a problem but voter apathy is a bigger problem.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

An indirect election is one thing, but the EC isn't democratic. Not even close.

And voter "apathy" (more like resignation) is mostly a problem because, with very few center-left exceptions, the major parties only cater to the rich and others with right wing policy positions.

To have nobody who represents you faithfully in Congress or the white House is de facto disenfranchisement, not apathy or laziness.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In the most recent election, as it was an election, trump nearly won. That's apathy, not resignation.

None of the candidates in the republican side can get support over trump. Again, apathy. I'm no saying they are good candidates, but a bucket of vomit would be better than a narcissist who steers the country towards civil war and fascism, only caring about his own enrichment.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There are myriad possible reasons for people not voting, including but not limited to

  1. Voter suppression makes it extremely difficult to impossible for many, especially in the states and districts that Trump won. Voter suppression that the Dems keep promising to do something about.

  2. The disenfranchisement through lack of faithful representation I mentioned

  3. Having no energy left after working grueling hours on election day

  4. Going to college in a state that only allows permanent residents to vote and being unable to return to your hometown for election day

But you just automatically assume that it's the only one that's completely unquantifiable and absolves yourself and your favourite politicians from all responsibility.

That's very convenient, don't you think?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Not at all, but while all of those reasons can and should be addressed, the vast majority of people not voting are choosing not to for other reasons. It's not inability it's lack of will. The reason one side is trying to stifle the voice of the other by gerrymandering and making registration difficult is because votes matter. Yet many people choose not to vote as they think their vote doesn't make a difference. It's apathy more than barriers.

Too tired to vote is not a real reason. There is postal voting in many states. Despite postal voting in some states, and states without the type of problems you cite, voter turnout is still low. It's a big problem.

You're complaining about disenfranchised voters while downvoring comments you don't agree with. I assume the irony is lost on you.

I don't care about Internet points. The whole system on Lemmy is to make posts more visible. You're choosing to stifle conversation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think it's more damning to see how many eligible voters saw his disastrous administration, and still didn't vote.

Imagine seeing Trump on the golf course for a literal year out of his term and thinking, "Yeah, I don't care if that guy wins or loses again."

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Imagine seeing 4 years of the kind of damage Trump can do, running on returning to the exact same status quo that made a demagogue like him all but inevitable, and then shaming everyone who doesn't think that's a great idea as indifferent 🤦

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't have to imagine it, because that's exactly what I'm doing.

If anyone thinks America before Trump was just as bad as America during Trump, they literally don't deserve the right to vote, because they lack critical thinking skills and empathy for their fellow people.

Oh, and PS: your "enlightened centrism" is neither.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

I think you're thoroughly misunderstanding what I'm saying. You're definitely misunderstanding where I'm coming from.

What I'm saying is that it's not enough to return to how things were just before Trump, because things were so damn bad for so many people that they (extremely unwisely and in most cases with malicious intent) made TRUMP president.

To go "you know what? We need to do exactly the same things that we had been doing for 30 years when the disaster happened" is absolute lunacy that invites the disaster back.

In case you still can't tell, I'm not a centrist. I'm a progressive who knows that it's no longer 1992 like the DNC thinks but also that it's beginning to smell a lot like 1920s Italy when fascists first came to power while liberals didn't use what power they had to stop them either.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

except its not true and you should fact check things you read on the internet before condemning an entire country

[–] [email protected] 33 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Trump attorneys said they didn’t know to which part of the company the ruling applied

gestures towards all of it and then makes a completely different, significantly ruder gesture at them

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 years ago

BURN MOTHER FUCKER

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The future eh? Good thing I can see that. My future vision says that eventually T***p will die and his idiot sack spawn will waste whatever is left after the government finishes chewing on his economic corpse. Ivanka will no longer have to think about her horny weirdo dad, Eric will mourn for the hug he never got, Don Junior will switch from cocaine to meth, Tiffany still won't matter, and Barron will probably get arrested for something weird and gross in his 30s. Oh and Melania will make a fortune on book sales and public speaking while thanking God it's finally over.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

While Trump Tower is eshine as the Trump homeless community center our whatever. We will make all his hotels homeless and low cost housing and we dedicate them all to him.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah. For a trump based business, I would imagine it’s next to impossible to turn a profit legitimately.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 years ago

That's what happens when the leader is a nepo baby who's also an idiot who thinks himself infallible 🤷

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

How about the future is - NO FUTURE. Shutter the place.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


At a pre-trial hearing Wednesday, Trump attorneys said they didn’t know to which part of the company the ruling applied and were starting to work out what may need to be dissolved to comply with the judge’s surprise decision.

Trump attorney Christopher Kise stressed during Wednesday’s hearing that the judge’s ruling injected fresh uncertainty for his team about the fast-approaching trial and raised a host of questions for them, including over how far-reaching the decision is for the company.

“It’s the reason why I’m saying we would ask the court for a little more time with the monitor,” he said, referring to a retired federal judge who had been appointed several years ago to oversee the company’s financial statements.

Engoron said in his ruling that a receiver will be put in place to “manage the dissolution” of the corporate entities, a move that is rare outside of cases where a judge finds there to be a notable amount of business fraud, according to Simon Miller, a New York-based attorney with broad expertise on receiverships.

Engoron said in his ruling that the issues that will be determined at trial include how much Trump will be held liable for in the lawsuit and the amount of disgorgement, or ill-gotten funds, the company will need to pay to the attorney general’s office.

Kise said in a separate statement that the judge’s decision is “outrageous” and argued that it “seeks to nationalize one of the most successful corporate empires in the United States and seize control of private property.”


The original article contains 1,128 words, the summary contains 255 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So who's looking into the not at suspicious 1bil deal ivankas idiot got.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

You're a billion short, there.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Gosh, and those steaks were tasty. Good thing I still have a bunch in the freezer.