Dem
51
GOP
49
Yesterday, Donald Trump's attorneys told the New York Appellate Division that their client just can't come up with the money needed to post the roughly $470 million bond he needs to post while trying to get the judgment against him overturned.
According to Team Trump, the former president has approached 30 different surety companies about underwriting the bond and has found no takers, because the insurers want liquid assets as collateral (securities, cash, etc.) and won't accept real estate for the purpose when so much money is involved. Perhaps this is true; it's not so easy to unload high-end real estate, especially when the guy who would be valuing it is in trouble for lying about the value of his properties. On the other hand, perhaps the full truth is that Trump just doesn't have enough equity in his properties for it to be viable to use them as collateral. That could be true if they are not nearly as valuable as he says they are, or if he's already mortgaged them to the hilt for other purposes. Or both.
Trump offered to post a $100 million bond instead. For those who do not have their calculators handy, or their staff mathematician available due to the aftereffects of St. Patrick's Day, $100 million is a wee bit less than $470 million. Alternatively, yesterday's filing implies that if Trump was given more time, he'd be able to come up with the money, either by finding a sucker... er, lender to underwrite the bond, or by selling some property. However, if he has to come up with cash on an expedited timeline, the filing whines... er, says, he may have to sell at a "massive, irrecoverable" loss. Hm, too bad he didn't know, say, three months ago—when Judge Arthur Engoron ruled that Trump was guilty, and that his trial was primarily to establish exactly what the penalty would be—that he was going to need some cash.
Legally, Trump has no leg to stand on here (and we confirmed this with reader/lawyer R.E.M. in Brooklyn). In particular, part of the trade off for "we'll hear your appeal" is "but you'll make it easy to settle the matter when and if you lose." The courts generally don't like to do their part if the defendant isn't doing HIS part, particularly since the defendant's inability to do HIS part is pretty good evidence he can't actually satisfy the judgment. That said, as R.E.M. pointed out to us, "The five most useless words in the English language are 'Judge, you can't do that.'" So, you never know until you know. Reportedly, if Trump does not prevail here and does not somehow come up with the money, AG Letitia James will begin taking steps to enforce the judgment on March 25 (i.e., Monday of next week).
Meanwhile, on a somewhat related note, CNBC reports that Trump's fundraising does not appear to be going very well. The figures for 2024 are still fuzzy, but in 2023, he was down 62.5% among small-money donors as compared to 2019. It could be fatigue, since he's been hitting the base up for cash on a multiple-times-daily basis for nearly a decade. It could also be that they don't want their "let's win the election" donations to somehow turn into "let's pay the lawyers" money.
At the same time, the big-money donors are largely keeping their checkbooks in their pockets. Normally, they would donate to the RNC or to the various PACs affiliated with Trump. But the fat cats definitely believe that their money would go to legal fees instead of campaigning, and they want no piece of that. Maybe getting rid of Ronna Romney McDaniel, and putting the RNC under the control of ultra-loyalists who will not say "no" to Trump under any circumstances was not the best idea, after all. In any case—and as we have predicted numerous times—it looks like the former president is going to have real problems meeting his legal expenses, and also paying for his campaign. Some unpleasant choices appear to be looming in the near future. (Z)