politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The cool thing is she’s probably going to have to take all of them because they’re all leverage to the tits and his ownership stake in them is worth almost nothing. lol
Trump Steaks?
Lol, fixed
One hockey puck topped with ketchup, please.
And a bottle of rubbing alcohol to go with that!
Worst cut of them all.
Interesting. If the government seizes properties that have been borrowed against, the government has to pay those loans? Can't just cancel them or anything? Then you're right and they might be worth a pittance. Especially after the over-inflating fraud. I wonder if Trump was able to get loans based on their fraudulent amounts.
No. The state gets what part he still owns— Trump still owes the debts. If it ends up Trump really has nothing and, after seizing all of his real estate and investments, it still doesn’t amount to what he owes the state, Trump will have to declare personal bankruptcy. At that point, all of his assets will go up for sale and all his debt consolidated and managed, and all of his income will be garnished until his debt is paid off.
This may, in fact, be what happens. Just like Rudy Giuliani and Alex Jones.
I'm so hoping that Jones sees the IW brand sold to someone who will make it a reasonable force for good. I know the Knowledge Fight guys would love to have it, and they're fighting the real info war!
I think it would be far better to see it dissolved, dead and gone, once, and for all.
What, Alex jones? agreed.
If a property is seized the government only gets the equity that the owner had in it so if Trump owns a 2B in property but owes 1.5B then the government may seize all 2B in order to satisfy the debt he owes the government. Worse the government will try to get as much value as possible but the value realized by a short term sale may be less than could have been realized had the customer had time to find the appropriate buyer. So if they only get 300M they can seize additional properties to satisfy the debt.
Nobody in their right mind wants the government doing this for them instead of mortgaging and or selling their own stuff. He committed such obvious fraud he should have known the jig was up when it went to trial and started seeking buyers or mortgaging. They could have self funded an appeal bond hoping to reduce the damages and prepared for worst case losing it all.
I assume what's worse with the 300M scenario is that he still owes the other parties the 1.5B. Since the collateral is now gone, those parties will immediately demand full payment. So he'll be forced to sell other properties to pay those debts, and it's a cascade of a whole other set dominos of fire sales.
The dominos will fall like a house of cards, checkmate
It should go something like forced sale, closing debts as those parties have nothing to do with it, balance to the state.... Rinse and repeat until it adds up to enough.
I sure hope all this stress combined with a diet of big macs and snorting Adderall doesn't give him a fatal heart attack (•_•)
Not the government directly, from my understanding the loan payment comes from the sale amount, before it is applied to the judgment. The property would end up being sold, then minus any outstanding debts on the property, and the remainder applies towards the judgment.
Outstanding loans must still be repaid, creditors don't get screwed just because it's part of a court judgment and seizure, in fact they get an immediate return. Depending on the loan agreement, if there are prepayment penalties for those loans... those would likely apply as well.
So it is technically possible it seems, with Trump's fraudulent property valuations for loans, that he could end up with a negative overall return by selling various highly leveraged property. If they fraudulently valued something at say $600M and got a loan for $500M based on that... but the property is actually valued and sells for $300M, that loan would be underwater, like millions of American homes. He would still owe $200M for that loan, but would no longer have the property.
If all of his properties are massively overvalued and highly leveraged against, he could end up with basically nothing left from this. Forced to declare personal bankruptcy and losing all the real estate. Court judgments for fraud very rarely can be discharged by bankruptcy, so while other debts might be discharged the penalties will likely all apply, regardless.
I believe the sales would count as income for tax purposes next year as well. Just to be another kick in the nuts.
Here is an interesting question in the example case where he owes 500M on a 300M property ergo negative equity can the government still force the sale when the expected return is negative ergo the government expects to get nothing? Alternatively are seizures irrespective of expected return and if it turns out to be overvalued it's his problem?
The government forces the sale and facilitates, they do not take the face value. This can be a real shit show.
A smart person should never allow the government to do the sale. These things should have been for sale months ago.
The government gets the money from the sale. If the sale is worth more than he owes the government, then he gets the extra. Trump is left to pay the loans off himself.
If this is as bad as the newspapers are saying then his creditors are already counting everything up and waiting for him to miss a payment so they can take whatever the government doesn't. In some states they may be able to use this fraud ruling to demand the entire loan amount back immediately.
I do believe the people previously loaning money on the property get paid BEFORE the government so the net effect of seizure isn't seizure FROM innocent parties. So if he owes 100M on a 80M property I'm wondering if the seizure goes through at all as there is no value to seize. if he owes 80M on a 100M property the government gets the 20M and keeps taking his shit. I suspect that the government ends up seizing a broad swath of property and holds it while they figure out what they have actually gotten and it takes months to actually shake out. I think if he's under water he'll end up losing it by virtue of being under water in the loan. In WA understandably a different state this is an issue with commercial property. If its revalued at less than the loan the loan can be called.
I'm sure it's all very complicated. I was just talking about the simple facts we're all here to celebrate.
I'd like to see Donald send his Trumpanzee cult against the banks. We'll see the justice system magically start working, and swiftly, if he endangers billionaires or their profits.
This sounds like it wouldn't be just another bankruptcy, either. He's gone through the bankruptcy process before. Lots of businesses do as a strategic move. He could end up with absolutely nothing after this, and even if he lived for another few decades (unlikely), he has no foundation for rebuilding.