Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, has begun the process of seizing one of past president Donald Trump’s qualities. The communist attorney general who “gested Trump” has pledged to seize his qualities if he is able to pay the$ 464 million excellent that James ‘ dubious civil fraud case imposed on him.
On March 6, James registered Judge Arthur Engoron’s$ 464 million decision against Trump in Westchester County, according to a Westchester County , online databases. If James is unable to pay the fine by Monday, the walk will make it easier for him to seize the 140-acre Trump National Golf Club in Westchester and the Seven Springs farm, both of which are in the New York district.
Assumptions against the Trump Organization, as well as Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, have also been filed in the state.
Trump’s lawyers have sought court endorsement for a reduced ,$ 100 million tie, which could result in a decision immediately. In a split court processing, Trump’s lawyers have stated that securing the total amount is a “practically impossibility”.
” The amount of the view, with curiosity, exceeds$ 464 million, and very few bonding companies will consider a bond of something approaching that magnitude”, Trump’s lawyers said. ” Despite searching the market, we have failed to obtain a bond for the Judgment Amount for Defendants because, given the circumstances, it is practically impossible to obtain an appeal bond for$ 464 million.”
If Trump is unable to pay the fine by Monday, March 25, James has recently stated that she is prepared to seize his properties and other resources. In an interview with ABC News last month, James said,” If he does not have the funds to pay off the view, then we will seek wisdom protection systems in court and we will question the judge to seize his property.”
Matt Whitaker, the ex-Acting U.S. Attorney General, and a number of other legal authorities have urged Trump to raise objections to the enthusiastic good on grounds of the 8th Amendment.
” But, you know, there are supposed to be no excessive fines and, you know, no cruel and unusual punishment. It’s a legal straight. Our founding fathers were aware that this was a means by which the state could hurt unpopular people,” Whitaker told Newsmax in reference to the 8th Amendment. ” Well, you know, 250 years after about, here we are with this same threat because they, you know, the founding father understood one thing and that was mortal nature”.
The previous acting solicitor general went on to determine that the good will eventually be lowered, if no tossed out completely, under the 8th Amendment.
