WFFaithful
Well-known member
So what happens?
Well yeah he could just have the bankers murdered.Makes sense you wouldn’t want to loan him money knowing that if he wins the presidency there is no way you can reclaim your money.
Was going to say that I understand bankers not wanting to take his mis-appraised properties as collateral, but this applies also.Well yeah he could just have the bankers murdered.
There's a reason why the lawyers don't have to take an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.is there any repercussion (I assume not) for his lawyer going all over TV saying of course he has the money and then it turns out he does not in fact?
It seems more problematic that someone could openly commit fraud to the extent where a judgment of that size can be substantiated by the facts.I love that he can't pay it in the sense that bad things need to happen to bad people, but I wonder if a judgement that heavy will be allowed to stand if it's appealed higher. It essentially amounts to the state setting a punitive civil penalty so high that they can ensure seizing your property. I understand if it's a tax debt owed to the state, or some other damages owed, but it feels problematic that a state can set the penalty so high than no bond can be obtained.
Poor people get bonds set against them that they can't pay all the time. Making an exception here seems like it would look bad.I love that he can't pay it in the sense that bad things need to happen to bad people, but I wonder if a judgement that heavy will be allowed to stand if it's appealed higher. It essentially amounts to the state setting a punitive civil penalty so high that they can ensure seizing your property. I understand if it's a tax debt owed to the state, or some other damages owed, but it feels problematic that a state can set the penalty so high than no bond can be obtained.