Attorney General Rejects Trump After He Can’t Pay…

by Jessica
31 views

A recent filing from New York State Attorney General Letitia James countered the claim made by former President Donald Trump’s legal team that paying his full $464 million judgment by March 25 was practically impossible.

Submitted by Senior Assistant Solicitor General Dennis Fan on Wednesday, the filing rejected Trump’s appeal of the judgment handed down by Judge Arthur Engoron.

Trump’s legal team argued that he lacked the necessary cash on hand, but the filing stated that their assertion was based on the false premise that Trump needed to secure a single bond from a single surety for the entire amount.

The filing emphasized that Trump’s team failed to provide documentary evidence detailing the real property offered to sureties, the terms of the offer, or the reasons for the sureties’ reluctance to accept the assets.

It suggested that the sureties may have declined Trump’s specific holdings as collateral due to the need for property appraisal and the perceived lower value of his assets.

Contrary to Trump’s team’s claim, the filing argued that using real estate as collateral for an appeal bond is not impossible in general.

MSNBC covered the development, with NBC News Justice and Intel correspondent Ken Dilanian explaining Trump’s lawyer’s argument that Trump lacked the cash liquidity to pay the bond.

They contended that liquidating his real estate at reduced prices due to his perceived financial distress would cause irreparable harm to the former president.

In response, the attorney general emphasized the state’s preference for cash over real estate assets, which are challenging to sell and of uncertain value.

MR. TRUMP’S LAWYERS SAY HE DOES NOT HAVE THE CASH LIQUIDITY TO PAY THIS BOND. SO THEY SAY HE WOULD HAVE TO LIQUIDATE SOME OF HIS REAL ESTATE AT FIRE SALE PRICES TO COME UP WITH THE MONEY BECAUSE PEOPLE WOULD KNOW HE’S IN DISTRESS. AND THEY WOULD SAY, THEY SAY THAT THAT WOULD CAUSE IRREPARABLE INJURY TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RESPONDED THAT THE ALTERNATIVE ESSENTIALLY WOULD BE TO STICK THE STATE WITH REAL ESTATE ASSETS INSTEAD OF CASH TO SATISFY THE BOND, AND THOSE ARE HARD TO SELL, AND THEY’RE OF UNCERTAIN VALUE. SO THE STATE DOESN’T WANT THAT. THE STATE WANTS THE CASH.

Defendants supply no documentary evidence that demonstrates precisely what real property they offered to sureties, on what terms that property was offered, or precisely why the sureties were unwilling to accept the assets. As far as the Court can infer, sureties may have refused to accept defendants’ specific holdings as collateral because using Mr. Trump’s real estate will generally need ‘a property appraisal’ … and his holdings are not nearly as valuable as defendants claim.

Related Posts