Ooooh, I could really use some mutually assured destruction.
6 Likes
I meant my comment to be encouraging. They don’t have anyone to coalesce around in the absence of Trump, and it’s going to be a long time before anyone climbs to the top of that shitpile.
6 Likes
The thing is that at the moment, one side is actually, actively, proudly taking away people’s rights, while the other hasn’t taken a single right away from anyone.
9 Likes
If 45 can’t be king of the mountain of 
, he might still try to play the role of kingmaker/ puppet master. This also keeps the wannabes from alienating him, even though his endorsements don’t always work.
9 Likes
I’m late in commenting on this story, other than my gif above. But now I’ve read some of the ruling, and to echo what a few people above have said, Trump’s appeal is going nowhere. And there is some snark in the ruling, and it’s pretty close to the beginning, and is the biggest indicator that an appeal will be unsuccessful:
Standing and Capacity to Sue
Defendants’ arguments that OAG has neither capacity nor standing to sue under Executive Law
§ 63(12), and that the disclaimers of non-party accountants Mazars insulate defendants, invoke
the time-loop in the film “Groundhog Day.” This Court emphatically rejected these arguments
in its preliminary injunction decision and in its dismissal decision, and the First Department
affirmed both. Defendants’ contention that a different procedural posture mandates a
reconsideration, or a forfiori, a reversal, is pure sophistry.
Their previous appeals have been rejected. They keep making the same arguments over and over, and the judge and the appellate court have already rejected them. Twice. Now they will get rejected by the appellate court a third time. Trump is done and out of options in this particular case.
16 Likes
Zillow says $24M, same ballpark. Just for laughs, there’s a property across the street valued at $42M, and another property just south of it valued at $107M. I’m starting to suspect Mar-a-Lago’s current occupant may be artificially lowering the property value by merely being there. 
15 Likes
Aren’t there also restrictions on what can be done (in terms of building new structures or modifying existing structures) at Mar-a-Lago? Wikipedia says it’s a National Historic Landmark and I’m wondering if restrictions on modifying a NHL would also have the effect of lowering its value to someone who’d otherwise want to customize their new property.
10 Likes
Referring tangentially instead of directly to GAAP?
5 Likes
I love that the MAGAts are so worked up over the fact that Mar-a-Lago is only worth $18M and thinking it’s the judge that determined this value when in fact that number comes directly from the Palm Beach County Assessor’s office.
From 2011-2021, the Palm Beach County Assessor appraised the market value of Mar-a-Lago at
between $18 million and $27.6 million. NYSCEF Doc. No. 905.
Donald Trump’s SFCs for 2011-2021 value Mar-a-Lago at between $426,529,614 million and $612,110,496, an overvaluation of at least 2,300%, compared to the assessor’s appraisal.
The summary judgement goes into delicious detail as to how this number came about and why the judge rejected Trump’s inflated value. He also explains how Trump basically fucked himself by agreeing to perpetual encumbrances in order to turn it into a social club vs. a private residence which substantially lowers it’s value.
Absolute Chef’s Kiss! No notes!
Trump fucked himself by seeking to turn Mar-a-Lago into a social club in order to get property tax reductions from Palm Beach. In doing so, he placed significant restrictions on the property which drastically lowers it’s overall value since it can no longer be used or converted back to a private residence by any future owner without town approval. His inflated numbers do not reflect these restrictions.
19 Likes
Maybe. But he’s also an incredibly vindictive man who has no values of any kind beyond his own self-aggrandizement, so I can absolutely see him intentionally sabotaging the Republican party’s chances at the ballot box if he isn’t selected as the nominee.
13 Likes
7 Likes
I don’t know… The Dr Schneider thing meant they had to write off loans - but they also ended up owning nice prime real estate. IIRC, in the long run they made a tidy profit.
2 Likes
there’s a variety of ways to construct that sentence, and the judge chose one that - in my head - sounds most like an aggrieved parent talking about the annoying behavior of their toddler.
i agree it’s debatable, and i probably should have said “snark” rather than “the snark” to better convey my meaning
4 Likes
Obviously, this Court cannot consider an “expert affidavit” that is based on unexplained and unsubstantiated “dream[s].”
10 Likes
Thank you for taking my vague notion of restrictions on Mar-a-Lago and finding the references to said restrictions.
5 Likes
A defense they’ve been trying in this case is that while Trump may have been lying to the banks, none of the banks actually lost money, so no harm no foul right? It’s not a defense, because it was screwing up the market, but I think it might mean the banks don’t have standing to sue.
3 Likes
No, it’s the first thing. DeSantis and all the other also-rans are at this point in it for 2028, and know that saying anything against Trump now will lose them some 2028 votes. Check out Hasan grilling Ramaswamy about his anti-Trump tweet.
4 Likes
… Greek for “bullshit,” I suppose 
7 Likes
