this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2026
276 points (99.3% liked)

politics

30601 readers
2346 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] disorderly@lemmy.world 62 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Honestly, this whole situation makes me think we need to restructure civil case outcomes to better protect the plaintiff. I'd like it if that $5M also had a nice interest rate of 100% or so, making this strategy a little less enticing.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 25 points 3 weeks ago

Good news: we already did that! It's called "tort reform" and it...

aim[s] to reduce the ability of plaintiffs to bring tort litigation (particularly actions for negligence) or to reduce damages they can receive

...oh.

[–] mkwt@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The $5 million is earning interest at the "judicial interest rate". Which is 4% (and tied to t-bonds) instead of 100%. That's how the $5 million became $5.8 million during the appeal.

Trump was also probably required to post an appeal bond in cash or other security to cover the entire amount of the judgement plus expected interest. So when Caroll does finally get her money, the check is probably going to come from an escrow service or similar, not from Trump directly.

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Which also makes this whole thing so much more petty, since he technically already paid the settlement; it's no longer his money.

[–] Arancello@aussie.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago

unfortunately the folks in charge will never let that happen. it might cost them some pocket change.

[–] modestmeme@lemmy.world 34 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

He treats everyone like he treats contractors…

Even his rape victims.

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe 9 points 3 weeks ago

Deadbeat billionaire.

[–] psycotica0@lemmy.ca 28 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

This is how you know it's a sickness. Wikipedia claims Trump's worth to be around 6.5 and 7 billion dollars. Nuts, but not what this is about. 5 million dollars is about 0.07% of his published worth.

The median American has a net worth of $124,041 so if we use that same percent we get that the equivalent payout for an average American would be about $88. So, like, not nothing, but probably not something that's worth stringing along for years and doing everything you can to get out of.

I know I've paid higher fines than that just to make problems go away because I didn't want to deal with them, and I'm a serial procrastinator!

[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 16 points 3 weeks ago

Pedophile rapist narciststs don't think like normal people

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago

The estimates of Trump's net worth are much less reliable than most net worth estimates. For example, a big chunk of his net worth is now in meme coins. They tend to calculate his net worth by saying each coin is priced at $X and he has Y coins, so his net worth is $X*Y. But, the second he starts trying to sell those shitcoins, the price will plummet. There's nothing backing those shitcoins, there's no real demand for them. People are only holding onto them because they think maybe other people will believe they're valuable. If Trump sells them, the game is up and everyone knows they're worthless, so the true value of what he owns in coins is a tiny fraction of that.

People have been trying to bribe him in various ways. But, again, that's often through crypto, so it's not like real money you can spend. Most of his net worth used to be in the supposed value of having his name on various properties. He didn't own the building, but he'd slap "Trump" on it and collect royalties. But, right now, for most of the world slapping "Trump" on something decreases its value.

People who are rich via huge amounts of stock in a company they started are sort-of in a similar boat, but to a lesser extent. Elon Musk is worth, on paper, nearly $1 trillion. But, that's due to comically ridiculous overvaluations of Space X and Tesla. He can sell a bit of his stock without triggering a massive sell-off. But, if he wanted to sell every share he owns and convert his money into cold hard cash, he could only get a small fraction of $1T because selling off big amounts of his companies would cause other people to sell off too, and the value would tank. In the mean time though, he can still go to a bank and borrow money against the supposed value of his shares. That's something Trump can't do because banks have realized that he can't be trusted to repay his loans, so they won't loan him money.

So, Trump could pay off this $5m judgment, but not without it seriously taking a bite out of his actual, liquid net worth. I'm sure a lot of the reason he's refusing to pay is that he doesn't want to, or doesn't want to set a precedent, or just likes getting away with not paying his bills. But, another reason is that for him $5m really is a lot of money because his supposed billionaire status is with a lot of asterisks.

[–] Lemming6969@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

He hates her for winning. It's not about the money, it's about winning.

[–] jennybesserit@lemmy.zip 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

she better be getting interest on top too

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 weeks ago

Checking the summary above, which quotes the article, I think your question is answered.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

IMO, this case is a kind of "canary in the coal mine" for whether or not the US can maybe return to a country governed by laws. Trump is massively corrupt. He has been pardoning all kinds of criminals. His justice department has been jailing innocent people and refusing to investigate obvious crimes. He has openly admitted to crimes in press conferences, and that's just becoming normal now.

But, despite all that, this judgment is out there and he can't seem to make it go away. If this were Russia, E Jean Carroll would have "committed suicide" by now, maybe leaving a note behind about how she was so sorry to have falsely accused Donald J. Trump, and how he was a tremendous, so tremendous leader, and man, some people are saying maybe the best that has ever lived. The judge that ruled against him would have accidentally fallen out of a window.

So, this might be a kind of Hungary situation, where there's a leader who has warped the entire country and seems all powerful, but who is simply voted out of office and is no longer driving the headlines.

[–] TachyonTele_Esq@piefed.social 4 points 3 weeks ago

We're a little past the canary.

[–] Batmorous@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

You're spot on that is where we are at

And the getting him out comes from working together. The country outnumbers them by a ton. We all must keep doing and working together. We will win with the most people doing day in and day out. Onward everyone!! Grow the cuaee and let's succeed!!