Trump One Week To Pay $83.3 Million To E. Jean Carroll She’s Expressing ‘ Serious Concerns'

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

 Federal Insurance Company, subsidiary of Chubb, is licensed in the State of Indiana.

 

yes, and... ? Still beholden to the POS Chubb.

[jerrymahoney]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

yes, and... ? Still beholden to the POS Chubb.

Your Raw Story article is out of date. It quotes a 2022 report. Since then, Switzerland has honored in part  EU sanctions on Russia. POS Chubb is Swiss registered company.

 

1.3        Have there been any significant changes or developments impacting your jurisdiction’s sanctions regime over the past 12 months?

 

No.  However, on February 28, 2022, in a remarkable u-turn from its previous policy traditionally driven by the country’s state of neutrality, the Federal Council decided to implement the sanctions imposed by the EU against Russia and Belarus in connection with Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine.

 

While Switzerland does not automatically adopt each further EU sanctions package against Russia and Belarus, the Federal Council has so far relatively consistently revised the Swiss sanctions regime to substantially reflect additional EU sanctions packages enacted in the meantime.

 

https://iclg.com/practice-areas/sanctions/switzerland

[ozimoron]

8 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Your Raw Story article is out of date. It quotes a 2022 report. Since then, Switzerland has honored in part  EU sanctions on Russia. POS Chubb is Swiss registered company.

 

1.3        Have there been any significant changes or developments impacting your jurisdiction’s sanctions regime over the past 12 months?

 

No.  However, on February 28, 2022, in a remarkable u-turn from its previous policy traditionally driven by the country’s state of neutrality, the Federal Council decided to implement the sanctions imposed by the EU against Russia and Belarus in connection with Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine.

 

While Switzerland does not automatically adopt each further EU sanctions package against Russia and Belarus, the Federal Council has so far relatively consistently revised the Swiss sanctions regime to substantially reflect additional EU sanctions packages enacted in the meantime.

 

https://iclg.com/practice-areas/sanctions/switzerland

 

You'll need to unpack that. Are you saying that Chubb's companies are no longer insuring Russian oil drillers?

[jerrymahoney]

I am saying what I wrote. This was a surety transaction underwritten by a company registered in Indiana. If you have a problem with that, write to their insurance commissioner.

[Woof999]

35 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

The amount was ridiculous and politically motivated to weaken Trump.

 

So the jury is in on this massive conspiracy too?

 

35 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

If Dave the plumber did the same thing it would have been about 20,000 dollars.

 

...but Dave the plumber didn't do it. Trump did. The large sum was for punitive damages. How would $20k be punitive towards the don? Perhaps if he would stop running his mouth off about how successful he thinks he is and how much he says he's worth, the punitive damages would reflect his real position rather than the fairytale he wants everyone to believe.

[ozimoron]

11 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I am saying what I wrote. This was a surety transaction underwritten by a company registered in Indiana. If you have a problem with that, write to their insurance commissioner.

 

I have a huge problem with sanction busting companies helping Russia and I'm ok with saying it here. My theory is that Putin put in a call....

Edited March 9 by ozimoron

[Lacessit]

Chubb is not going to be posting the $91 million bond out of the goodness of their hearts. They know they have Trump by the balls.

My guess is the daily interest rate on the bond would be eye-watering.

[n00dle]

he has a lifelong history of skipping out on his bills. 

 

On 3/2/2024 at 5:54 AM, Social Media said:

Trump is effectively asking the court to trust in his wealth without providing adequate assurance

and that is how he does it. 

[jerrymahoney]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I have a huge problem with sanction busting companies helping Russia and I'm ok with saying it here. My theory is that Putin put in a call....

Well maybe RawStory can come up with some more current info on that.

[Chomper Higgot]

59 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

 

Seems that $400 million claim was made under oath, possibly if that statement was proven to be untrue some additional legal jeopardy might be forthcoming.

Unlikely that any legal jeopardy will be added, but it sure might scupper any arguments for ‘extra time to secure a bond’.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

USA has a serious flaw in its legal system.  How can a person (whoever) be punished financially for the unproven allegations of another person.  If a person has been found guilty of committing a crime, then and only then should there be a civil case seeking compensation. Clearly the judicial system in parts of the USA has been taken over by political activism.  I can see Trump tearing down the Judicial structures and rebuilding them - perhaps like Orban did in Hungary to remove all the political activists who had been appointed to Judical positions by his political opponents. I wonder if Trump and Orban have/will discuss the details behind how he did that in Hungary so successfully. 

[herfiehandbag]

On 3/7/2024 at 2:22 AM, ozimoron said:

 

He's a trifle impecunious right now.

But I say fellows, like Billy Bunter, he is just waiting for his postal order...

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

USA has a serious flaw in its legal system.  How can a person (whoever) be punished financially for the unproven allegations of another person.  If a person has been found guilty of committing a crime, then and only then should there be a civil case seeking compensation. Clearly the judicial system in parts of the USA has been taken over by political activism.  I can see Trump tearing down the Judicial structures and rebuilding them - perhaps like Orban did in Hungary to remove all the political activists who had been appointed to Judical positions by his political opponents. I wonder if Trump and Orban have/will discuss the details behind how he did that in Hungary so successfully. 

 

It was the jury who convicted him.

[Walker88]

Right now it is just speculation as to how trump came up with the bond through Chubb. Obviously journalists will try to get a scoop, such as what was pledged, what is the cost, was there a co-signer, etc.

 

In a sense that is moot, because as part of the process of running for a national political office, a full financial disclosure must be submitted, which includes detail as to what outstanding loans or commitments one has and to whom. The public has a right to know to whom any official is beholden.

 

Whether trump likes it or not, this bond---and whatever he does to try to post the $453 million bond for his bank and insurance fraud convictions---will be made public.

[Walker88]

16 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

It was the jury who convicted him.

That poster and others don't seem to understand that punitive measures take several things into consideration, such as the supposed financial wherewithal of the guilty party, as well as considering---in this case of defamation---what is the level of punishment that will make the guilty party cease from continued defamation.

 

trump failed to keep his mouth shut after the first conviction, and since he continuously boasts of how, like, really really rich he is, the jury weighed both his mouth and his claimed wealth and assessed penalties.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Walker88 said:

That poster and others don't seem to understand that punitive measures take several things into consideration, such as the supposed financial wherewithal of the guilty party, as well as considering---in this case of defamation---what is the level of punishment that will make the guilty party cease from continued defamation.

 

trump failed to keep his mouth shut after the first conviction, and since he continuously boasts of how, like, really really rich he is, the jury weighed both his mouth and his claimed wealth and assessed penalties.

 

I think the basis of his appeal will be that he lied about his wherewithal and so the calculation was wrong. Kind of like the effect of a 450 million dollar judgement against me.

[jerrymahoney]

20 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I think the basis of his appeal will be that he lied about his wherewithal and so the calculation was wrong. Kind of like the effect of a 450 million dollar judgement against me.

First off, while Ms. Habba is the current Counsel of Record, the Appeal is going to largely managed by John Sauer, who was a law clerk to Assoc. Justice Antonin Scalia and was Solicitor General for the State of Missouri.

 

And the basis of appeal is really no mystery: It will largely come from the motion submitted by Ms. Habba and Mr. Sauer for a new trial that was rejected by Judge Kaplan.

[jerrymahoney]

35 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Right now it is just speculation as to how trump came up with the bond through Chubb. Obviously journalists will try to get a scoop, such as what was pledged, what is the cost, was there a co-signer, etc.

Via NY Times March 8, 2024, 11:04 a.m. ET:

 

The terms of Mr. Trump’s bond deal have not been publicly disclosed, but bonding companies often charge a fee of anywhere between 1 and 3 percent, and require enough collateral to cover the bond. Chubb, in a statement, said it did not comment on “client-specific” information, but that it provided appeal bonds in the normal course of business. “These bonds are an ordinary and important part of the American justice system, protecting the rights of both defendants and plaintiffs,” the company said.

 

https://archive.is/nZZwn

 

<< It could also be that Chubb does not inform Trump or any surety client with just whom they might have shared the risk.

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

20 hours ago, retarius said:

The original jury did not find him guilty of rape....and it awarded 2million in damages for defamation. This is a Toal political witch-hunt.

Many Americans agree with you, which is why each new politically inspired prosecution makes him more popular.

[Tug]

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Many Americans agree with you, which is why each new politically inspired prosecution makes him more popular.

Among a minority of misinformed sad souls as more cases hit trial more FACTS and EVIDENCE will come out heck lord knows there’s enough out there on audio video and directly out of trumps big mouth the felony convictions will pile up.if trump hadn’t tryed to pull a coup and steal the docs then obstruct he certainly would have gotten away with it im sure the feds dident want to open the can of worms it’s taking to get citizen trump behind bars

[ozimoron]

54 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Many Americans agree with you, which is why each new politically inspired prosecution makes him more popular.

 

Is E Jean Carroll a politician? Or a victim? Which is it?

[jerrymahoney]

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Is E Jean Carroll a politician? Or a victim? Which is it?

An opportunist.

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

An opportunist.

 

Right, because Donald needs the money more than she does? All victims who sue rich people are opportunists, right?

[jerrymahoney]

20 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Right, because Donald needs the money more than she does? All victims who sue rich people are opportunists, right?

Not much point in suing a poor person.

 

'Opportunist' because there was no direct evidence that Trump ever even met Carroll * but, in conjunction with her attorney, the case has been made in 2 separate trials that Trump is the kinda person who would do this.

 

* except for the much shown photo showing Trump 'met' Carroll on a charity event reception line.

 

BTW the Carroll response to the Trump appeal of the first (assault) verdict is due 15 March.

Edited March 10 by jerrymahoney

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Not much point in suing a poor person.

 

'Opportunist' because there was no direct evidence that Trump ever even met Carroll * but, in conjunction with her attorney, the case has been made in 2 separate trials that Trump is the kinda person who would do this.

 

* except for the much shown photo showing Trump 'met' Carroll on a charity event reception line.

 

Here's that jury problem again.

[jerrymahoney]

10 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Here's that jury problem again.

Absolutely. A jury can only make its decision based upon the evidence admitted in Court.

 

And the appeal of the assault verdict and the likely basis of the more current defamatory verdict is largely that the esteemed Judge Kaplan excluded evidence which should have been admitted and admitted evidence with should have been excluded.

Edited March 10 by jerrymahoney

[Tug]

55 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

An opportunist.

Oh jee there it was I dident know Jean Carroll forced trump into a dressing room and shoved her hand up his posterior lol naa trump tryed to rape her he’s convicted then he ran his yap and now he will pay simple as that he’s not getting away with that kind of behavior anymore 

[Danderman123]

If I were Ms. Carroll's attorney, I would not challenge the bond which was just posted.  It's basically money in the bank, minus whatever is carved out during the appeal.

Edited March 10 by Danderman123

[jerrymahoney]

15 minutes ago, Tug said:

Oh jee there it was I dident know Jean Carroll forced trump into a dressing room and shoved her hand up his posterior lol naa trump tryed to rape her he’s convicted then he ran his yap and now he will pay simple as that he’s not getting away with that kind of behavior anymore 

That's what is on appeal. Again Trump has submitted the basis of the appeal in the assault case. Maybe he will win -- maybe lose.

Edited March 10 by jerrymahoney

[Danderman123]

42 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

That's what is on appeal. Again Trump has submitted the basis of the appeal in the assault case. Maybe he will win -- maybe lose.

As this is a Federal case, the appeal will not be a repeat trial. Instead, Trump's lawyers will have to argue points of law.

 

If successful, there could be a new trial.

 

In rare cases, the verdict could be thrown out, and Trump could walk away.

 

But one probable aspect of the second appeal is argument about the size of the verdict.

Edited March 10 by Danderman123