Anonymous wrote:Hindenburg Research. That is quite an ironic name.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy who bailed him out got his money by laundering Russian assets.

Big surprise.



https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/axos-bank-trump-tower-donald-trump-1320670/

Axos Bank which refinanced Trump Tower is now the target of a short seller. Hindenburg Research released a report alleging that the bank has manipulated or distorted its credit metrics to conceal its exposure to potentially troubled commercial real estate loans.
https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/capital-markets/axos-bank-raising-eyebrows-it-doubles-down-on-cre-lending-including-to-criminals-report-124547

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The guy who bailed him out got his money by laundering Russian assets.

Big surprise.



https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/axos-bank-trump-tower-donald-trump-1320670/

Axos Bank which refinanced Trump Tower is now the target of a short seller. Hindenburg Research released a report alleging that the bank has manipulated or distorted its credit metrics to conceal its exposure to potentially troubled commercial real estate loans.
https://www.bisnow.com/national/news/capital-markets/axos-bank-raising-eyebrows-it-doubles-down-on-cre-lending-including-to-criminals-report-124547

Anonymous wrote:The guy who bailed him out got his money by laundering Russian assets.

Big surprise.



https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/axos-bank-trump-tower-donald-trump-1320670/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure that it should be a "heads" Trump wins and "tails" James loses situation.

The judges ruling:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-22-24/index.html

Under the terms of the agreement, Trump is required to keep the $175 million in the Charles Schwab account used to secure the bond as cash. Knight Specialty must have exclusive control of the account and may not withdraw or trade any of the funds in it. The company must also provide a monthly statement to the attorney general with the account’s balance. None of the agreements for securing the bond can be amended without the court’s approval, and Knight Specialty must submit to the jurisdiction of the court.

So, essentially James questioned whether Knight Insurance was good for the bond. They were not previously approved in NYS to provide surety, and there was a question about the finances of Knight Insurance to guarantee that they could pay out the bond should Trump lose on appeal.

By the agreement above, Trump has to put the money into the Schwab account, can't move it and has to provide regular accounting of the account. Additionally Trump cannot access the money, but Knight Insurance has sole administrative access to the account. In other words, if Trump loses, Knight guarantees that it can pay the bond. Essentially they have escrowed Trump's money. In the event that he wins the appeal, he can get the money back. If he loses the appeal, he loses the money. And Trump cannot control any of that, it will be handled by the courts and by Knight Insurance, just like a bond would.

I’m not seeing how this is a loss for NYS.

Does anyone know by when Trump must file his appeal?

I wondered what the point was of him using a bond and paying the fee for that instead of posting the cash, although I guess the interest on the account can bring in more than the fee depending on how long this goes on. And I supposed even if the cash cannot be touched by Trump it feels better to look at account with your name on it and $175M than to look at it zeroed out.

Then if he loses at appeal does that bond get immediately forfeited?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure that it should be a "heads" Trump wins and "tails" James loses situation.

The judges ruling:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-22-24/index.html

Under the terms of the agreement, Trump is required to keep the $175 million in the Charles Schwab account used to secure the bond as cash. Knight Specialty must have exclusive control of the account and may not withdraw or trade any of the funds in it. The company must also provide a monthly statement to the attorney general with the account’s balance. None of the agreements for securing the bond can be amended without the court’s approval, and Knight Specialty must submit to the jurisdiction of the court.

So, essentially James questioned whether Knight Insurance was good for the bond. They were not previously approved in NYS to provide surety, and there was a question about the finances of Knight Insurance to guarantee that they could pay out the bond should Trump lose on appeal.

By the agreement above, Trump has to put the money into the Schwab account, can't move it and has to provide regular accounting of the account. Additionally Trump cannot access the money, but Knight Insurance has sole administrative access to the account. In other words, if Trump loses, Knight guarantees that it can pay the bond. Essentially they have escrowed Trump's money. In the event that he wins the appeal, he can get the money back. If he loses the appeal, he loses the money. And Trump cannot control any of that, it will be handled by the courts and by Knight Insurance, just like a bond would.

I’m not seeing how this is a loss for NYS.

Does anyone know by when Trump must file his appeal?

I wondered what the point was of him using a bond and paying the fee for that instead of posting the cash, although I guess the interest on the account can bring in more than the fee depending on how long this goes on. And I supposed even if the cash cannot be touched by Trump it feels better to look at account with your name on it and $175M than to look at it zeroed out.

Then if he loses at appeal does that bond get immediately forfeited?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure that it should be a "heads" Trump wins and "tails" James loses situation.

The judges ruling:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-22-24/index.html

Under the terms of the agreement, Trump is required to keep the $175 million in the Charles Schwab account used to secure the bond as cash. Knight Specialty must have exclusive control of the account and may not withdraw or trade any of the funds in it. The company must also provide a monthly statement to the attorney general with the account’s balance. None of the agreements for securing the bond can be amended without the court’s approval, and Knight Specialty must submit to the jurisdiction of the court.

So, essentially James questioned whether Knight Insurance was good for the bond. They were not previously approved in NYS to provide surety, and there was a question about the finances of Knight Insurance to guarantee that they could pay out the bond should Trump lose on appeal.

By the agreement above, Trump has to put the money into the Schwab account, can't move it and has to provide regular accounting of the account. Additionally Trump cannot access the money, but Knight Insurance has sole administrative access to the account. In other words, if Trump loses, Knight guarantees that it can pay the bond. Essentially they have escrowed Trump's money. In the event that he wins the appeal, he can get the money back. If he loses the appeal, he loses the money. And Trump cannot control any of that, it will be handled by the courts and by Knight Insurance, just like a bond would.

I’m not seeing how this is a loss for NYS.

Does anyone know by when Trump must file his appeal?

I wondered what the point was of him using a bond and paying the fee for that instead of posting the cash, although I guess the interest on the account can bring in more than the fee depending on how long this goes on. And I supposed even if the cash cannot be touched by Trump it feels better to look at account with your name on it and $175M than to look at it zeroed out.

Then if he loses at appeal does that bond get immediately forfeited?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure that it should be a "heads" Trump wins and "tails" James loses situation.

The judges ruling:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-22-24/index.html

Under the terms of the agreement, Trump is required to keep the $175 million in the Charles Schwab account used to secure the bond as cash. Knight Specialty must have exclusive control of the account and may not withdraw or trade any of the funds in it. The company must also provide a monthly statement to the attorney general with the account’s balance. None of the agreements for securing the bond can be amended without the court’s approval, and Knight Specialty must submit to the jurisdiction of the court.

So, essentially James questioned whether Knight Insurance was good for the bond. They were not previously approved in NYS to provide surety, and there was a question about the finances of Knight Insurance to guarantee that they could pay out the bond should Trump lose on appeal.

By the agreement above, Trump has to put the money into the Schwab account, can't move it and has to provide regular accounting of the account. Additionally Trump cannot access the money, but Knight Insurance has sole administrative access to the account. In other words, if Trump loses, Knight guarantees that it can pay the bond. Essentially they have escrowed Trump's money. In the event that he wins the appeal, he can get the money back. If he loses the appeal, he loses the money. And Trump cannot control any of that, it will be handled by the courts and by Knight Insurance, just like a bond would.

I’m not seeing how this is a loss for NYS.

Does anyone know by when Trump must file his appeal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is this legal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure that it should be a "heads" Trump wins and "tails" James loses situation.

The judges ruling:
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-22-24/index.html

Under the terms of the agreement, Trump is required to keep the $175 million in the Charles Schwab account used to secure the bond as cash. Knight Specialty must have exclusive control of the account and may not withdraw or trade any of the funds in it. The company must also provide a monthly statement to the attorney general with the account’s balance. None of the agreements for securing the bond can be amended without the court’s approval, and Knight Specialty must submit to the jurisdiction of the court.

So, essentially James questioned whether Knight Insurance was good for the bond. They were not previously approved in NYS to provide surety, and there was a question about the finances of Knight Insurance to guarantee that they could pay out the bond should Trump lose on appeal.

By the agreement above, Trump has to put the money into the Schwab account, can't move it and has to provide regular accounting of the account. Additionally Trump cannot access the money, but Knight Insurance has sole administrative access to the account. In other words, if Trump loses, Knight guarantees that it can pay the bond. Essentially they have escrowed Trump's money. In the event that he wins the appeal, he can get the money back. If he loses the appeal, he loses the money. And Trump cannot control any of that, it will be handled by the courts and by Knight Insurance, just like a bond would.

Under the terms of the agreement, Trump is required to keep the $175 million in the Charles Schwab account used to secure the bond as cash. Knight Specialty must have exclusive control of the account and may not withdraw or trade any of the funds in it. The company must also provide a monthly statement to the attorney general with the account’s balance. None of the agreements for securing the bond can be amended without the court’s approval, and Knight Specialty must submit to the jurisdiction of the court.