mtutiger

True story: I've had discussions on abortion in the past where I've been assured that nothing would happen on IVF, despite the obvious incongruity of taking hard pro-life positions with the practice. Alabama's ruling just shows that everything is on the table.

I just wonder if the legal stuff, especially if coupled with SCOTUS denying his appeal on immunity and allowing the J6 trial to go on, scares away donors as well. Like, the cost / benefit analysis on that for any large $$$ donor cannot be great if the candidate is gonna be sitting in courtrooms while traditional candidates are out on the campaign trail.

Serious cash flow problems here...

Gross as it is, tells you how he's processing it

Never want to hear the term "Russia hoax" ever ever again

I believe I had read that, but maybe I'm misremembering. Interest continues to accrue on it as well.

I will preface this by saying that I am in no way downplaying the threat of Trump or what would happen if he ended up back in office or saying that he cannot win (as the polls currently indicate, yes he can).... Having said that, nobody will admit it (partially because the media seems primarily focused on issues related to Biden), but his campaign seems incredibly low energy right now. He doesn't draw the same crowds that he used to, he himself stumbles and rambles a lot when he speaks (even more than in 2016 or 2020) and, speaking as someone who lives in a pretty conservative area and recently traveled for family to an even more conservative area, you don't see nearly as much paraphernalia out in the wild as you did four years ago. All of this is to say that I expect the State of New York to do what it's going to do and there will be zero blood shed on account of it.

I kind of approach all of these cases, both the civil and criminal, from the view that committed Trump supporters aren't going to be persuaded by any of them. For what it's worth.

If the reaction to the actual ruling in the civil fraud trial is any indicator, I don't expect there to be rioters on the streets whenever the bill comes due.

For sure, I know what you meant... because NYS contains NYC and Wall Street, I think people underestimate the degree to which the NYS has experience in going after white collar fraud and enforcing consequences on judgments. But even still, the fact that the father and sons are barred from running the business for three years and there's a court-appointed monitor overseeing the company that has to approve all third party transactions is a pretty good example of there being actual consequences to these rulings. Or that Trump cannot take out loans with any bank chartered through the NYS Department of Financial Services, is another example of an actual consequence of this ruling that has an impact, especially when you consider how many banks are chartered in New York and the impact that would have on institutions outside of New York evaluating the credit-worthiness of Trump. I don't know the degree to which any of this impacts or doesn't impact the Presidential Election, obviously... but the point being made is that comparing the criminal cases and the civil cases against Trump are like comparing apples and oranges. We very well may not see anything come of the criminal stuff for many reasons, but even today, there are real world consequences playing out in the civil cases. That's just reality.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/meet-the-former-organized-crime-prosecutor-now-overseeing-the-trump-organization-077d4c34 In a way, they kind of are with the latest ruling.

1. Trump has already paid out some of the money in the E. Jean Carroll case, per the article. 2. If, hypothetically, he does not pay, the State of New York has legal recourse upon which to get said money. As mentioned in the article above. That is something that is completely independent of Trump's actions. These rulings are things that actually did happen to him, his business and associates (including his spawn Don Jr. And Eric). Hence why we are discussing them. Unless people are asserting that NYS will simply not enforce them at all, which I find to be unlikely, the money will be paid out one way or another.

The facts in the article speak for themselves. I'd encourage people to read it to understand what the implications of the recent civil rulings are versus just falling back on unverifiable and unfalsifiable mantras to explain everything.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-carroll-fines-82d423b8e7a7f9a32470729c5f4410e5 The whole article is informative and is worth a read as well... I understand the skepticism that anything will happen to him criminally, and honestly take more of a "seeing is believing" approach to it myself. But on the civil side, there's just not a lot of recourse. And I think his attitude toward these cases suggest they hurt as well.

You might be right, but they will be paid one way or another.

Possibly the last person drawing a check from National Review that is worth a damn.

I understand the defeatism / refrain here because it is an ever-persistent feature of the Trump era, but as far as the fines go, they will have to be paid one way or another.

Cody Cohost Rant for the Week: No, the Rangers City Connect jerseys were just as bad at the end of the season as they were at the beginning.

It took 72 hours for him to say something about Alexei Navalny, and then responds by trashing the country he purports to want to represent.

I'd add that it is borderline pathological that literally any negative observation about Trump or his campaign is met with "but 2016" Yes, he can still win. But FFS, it's 2024. Not everything needs to be qualified or compared to 2016.

Nobody is saying he cannot win. But it seems pretty obvious that this is not a good thing as well, for him or the party.

I'm not sure if it includes PAC expenditures or not, but I think I saw someone on Twitter suggest that Trump's entire 2020 campaign cost ~$350,000,000 in 2020. Which is almost equivalent to today's judgment (not including any potential interest charges that could be tacked on). We're all so jaded by this mindset of "everything that happens is good for Trump", but I honestly I'm really having a hard time seeing how this doesn't become a negative to both him and the GOP more generally. And given the inevitability of a this ruling, I'm a little more surprised there hasn't been more discussion about campaign financials more generally. This is all better suited to the 2024 thread, but it's the immediate thing that popped into my mind when I saw it lol