Attempting to buy Donald Trump seems to have put Don Hankey in jeopardy

Originally published at:


Donald Glover Reaction GIF

Go fasc, lose cash.


Shady deal? Face the wheel!


I’ll give it 50/50 as to whether this will have any consequences for the scummy sub-prime auto lender (possibly on the same level as Mike Lindell, where you start to flounder but the new All-Trump-All-The-Time RNC will shill for your business), and about 0.1% chance of it having any consequences for Trump. We live in the dumbest timeline.


Mr. Hankey?
Mr Hankey Christmas GIF by South Park


It’s kind of like conspiring to get a suspiciously cheap car insurance policy to drive in a state where insurance is legally mandated, but the fine print says that the company won’t pay out any claim. Bad news for both the company and the driver if they get caught.


Fraud? Trump? WHAT



“In your policy, it states quite clearly that no claim you make will be paid.
You see, you unfortunately plumped for our ‘Neverpay’ policy, which, you know, if you never claim is very worthwhile…but you had to claim, and, well, there it is.”


“Knight Specialty Insurance Company… does hereby… undertake that if the judgment… is dismissed… Donald J. Trump… shall pay… the sum directed.”

Oh, you sweet naive little land mermaid.

“Donald Trump shall pay”? Really? Based on past performance, what do you reckon the odds are of that actually happening?


That whole sentence makes no sense. If the judgment is dismissed, then nobody has to pay anything. Trump only owes money if the appeal is dismissed (which would leave the judgment in place). I’d love to know what the full sentence actually said (without all the ellipses).

Here’s the full article that the quote comes from, which doesn’t help with the above.

Meanwhile, it would be really nice to read something on this topic written by someone who actually knows something about appellate surety bonds in New York. It seems like the author of the article tried to do some real reporting by tracking down some experts, but didn’t really succeed. For example, later in the article there’s the following:

This is decidedly NOT a head-scratcher. It’s been widely reported that the appellate division reduced the bond requirement to a flat $175MM (rather than the typical/original requirement of the full judgment plus costs and interest). So of course the bond is limited to $175MM. How did this even make it in the article?


Junior. He’s not so smart. He was born with a peanut in his head.



I think “dismissed” means the court drops it from the dock. in which case Trump would have to pay no fine. Bring forth the Legalmancer to enlighten us.

1 Like

normally, for example, if i’m charged, and the court sets bail. if i can pay the full amount, i hand it to the court, and if it’s dismissed - i get it all back.

but if i can’t pay in full, then i pay a smaller amount to a bond company… and they pocket that cash forever.

they put a guarantee to the court to pay the full amount. so if i abscond, the bail company is on the hook, and that’s when they send out a bounty hunter.

( it’s common practice for criminal courts put bail at a price you can’t afford, but at a standard commission rate that you theoretically can. for example, by re-mortgaging or selling your house. hooray innocent till proven guilty )

if ■■■■■ pays nothing extra than it’s an interest free loan, because that money could be earning money elsewhere. everyone else would be charged an arm and a leg and several kidneys for a 175 million bond

i suspect that’s what they’re getting at.

1 Like

I’m not sure I follow. I’m not a litigator, but…

  1. This isn’t a criminal case. Nobody is “charged” with a crime and none of this has anything to do with bail.
  2. A “judgment” is the amount the defendant pays (plus costs and interest) if they lose a civil case. If the court “dismisses” the judgment, then it means the defendant doesn’t have to pay anything.
  3. The defendant is allowed to appeal, but the court doesn’t want them to use the time it takes to go through an appeal to hide assets or do other stuff that will prevent the plaintiff from recovering the amount of the judgment. So the defendant still has to pay even while they appeal, and if they don’t pay, then the plaintiff (here, the NYAG) can take actions to “execute” a judgment (seizing assets, etc.). As an alternative, the defendant can usually post a bond (i.e., a third party insurance company or other deep-pocketed party provides a written guarantee that the third party will pay if the defendant doesn’t) and get a “stay” of the judgment (i.e., the court won’t allow the plaintiff to seize assets until the appeal is resolved).
  4. Usually, the amount of of the bond is enough to cover the judgment plus all interest and costs that are likely to accrue during the course of the appeal. Here, Trump’s lawyers successfully argued that such a big bond was impossible (or at least impractical) to procure, so the court agreed to accept a bond for only $175MM instead of the larger, steadily-increasing amount (Trump is still on the hook for the full amount if he loses his appeals, but the maximum liability of the insurance company is $175MM). I actually think this was reasonable from a due process perspective, since Trump’s assets are mostly hard-to-hide real estate. If Trump ultimately loses all his appeals, the state can still seize his assets then and shouldn’t be in a significantly worse position than if they seized them now. But if Trump actually wins his appeals, he would be far worse off if his real estate holdings were sold off at fire sale prices now.
  5. The amount that Trump pays the bonding company isn’t relevant to the amount the bonding company guarantees in the bond.
1 Like

And then Trump skips bail and the bondsman hires a bounty hunter to bring him back like in the movies?

1 Like

The Child D GIF by Disney+

( unfortunately, our system has already proven the laws are not equally applied )

i’m not either. i was only expressing what i understand of the system, and what the reporters might have meant.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.