Trump's $175 Million Bond rejected by court

colddiesel

Literotica Guru
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Posts
5,529
Who 'da thunk it! The Bonding company failed to file an adequate financial reports and other procedural errors so the court clerk rejected it. Fairly easily rectified by the Bond financiers, but another chapter in the Trump circus. :LOL:
 
Who 'da thunk it! The Bonding company failed to file an adequate financial reports and other procedural errors so the court clerk rejected it. Fairly easily rectified by the Bond financiers, but another chapter in the Trump circus. :LOL:
Oh that's gota hurt his pride, he needs to file a financial report, it's not the Bonding company who needs to do it....ouch!!

(least that was my take from the article I read)
 
so since it was rejected for those reasons, which should never have been an issue in the filing, shouldn't he/team trump filing attorneys be fined for unfit submissions? another court time-waster and delaying events... a combination of trump demanding they file without the financial disclosure regardless and legal slapdashery? after all, he was given a reduction AND an extension already, so this is just taking the piss out of the system.
 
Oh that's gota hurt his pride, he needs to file a financial report, it's not the Bonding company who needs to do it....ouch!!

(least that was my take from the article I read)
No Fuzzy, I am pretty sure that it is the Bonding company or entity which has to come up with the financials, then it is for Trump to file it. Either an incompetent cock-up, or a deliberate delay - your choice!
 
Is the clock still set at the original ten days or does this filing trigger a new clock for a correction to be refiled?

Today is the 10th day if the date of the order March 25th is used. Tomorrow if March 26th.
 
It's an unlawful form over function rejection.

No one can be denied access to the courts merely because of a policy or procedural or clerical mistake. To do so places form or format over the function of the courts.

Further, the failure of the court to accept the bond because of procedural or policy requirement puts Trump in a position to claim his rights are being unlawfully denied by the courts and, without access to his lawful rights, the underlying case against him can be dismissed.

Finally, anyone who thought any bond or filing wouldn't be scrutinized for any errors all the way down to missing punctuation and rejected on that basis is fucked in the head. The courts should have been ahead of this and all the clerks should have been put on notice prior to any filing by Trump or his attorneys to not overly scrutinize the paperwork seeking a reason for a rejection.

Because that would be an UNLAWFUL form over function rejection.
 
No Fuzzy, I am pretty sure that it is the Bonding company or entity which has to come up with the financials, then it is for Trump to file it. Either an incompetent cock-up, or a deliberate delay - your choice!
I'm going with deliberate, no matter who's filling needed to be done......lol It's Trumps MO!
 
you're making less sense than when you try to explain your legal position.

derp.

Again, not my fault you're too fucking stupid to keep your mouth shut when you should be listening instead of crying like a lonely puppy.
 
Again, not my fault you're too fucking stupid to keep your mouth shut when you should be listening instead of crying like a lonely puppy.
if you had any pride or shame, you would have left here years ago after doxxing yourself, the carbon fiasco, and getting bested in legal arguments by morons.

it's not our fault, but it is our pleasure, to watch you flail around like a dodo with clipped wings.
 
if you had any pride or shame, you would have left here years ago after doxxing yourself, the carbon fiasco, and getting bested in legal arguments by morons.

it's not our fault, but it is our pleasure, to watch you flail around like a dodo with clipped wings.

Poor baby, still sucking on that bottle.
 
It's an unlawful form over function rejection.

No one can be denied access to the courts merely because of a policy or procedural or clerical mistake. To do so places form or format over the function of the courts.

Further, the failure of the court to accept the bond because of procedural or policy requirement puts Trump in a position to claim his rights are being unlawfully denied by the courts and, without access to his lawful rights, the underlying case against him can be dismissed.

Finally, anyone who thought any bond or filing wouldn't be scrutinized for any errors all the way down to missing punctuation and rejected on that basis is fucked in the head. The courts should have been ahead of this and all the clerks should have been put on notice prior to any filing by Trump or his attorneys to not overly scrutinize the paperwork seeking a reason for a rejection.

Because that would be an UNLAWFUL form over function rejection.
Awesome,now go over and write your explanation on how Eastman shouldn't have been disbarred....That's the one I've been waiting for. But hey if you need a couple more days to think it up, I can wait.
 
It's spelled damn. One would think a Lawyer would know that?

Are you illiterate or something? It's dam. As in dam this, dam that, and dam up those other raging rivers of bullshit that flow from you too.

Or is that too complicated for a simpleton like you?

Maybe if you drank some cooling and hydrating (Hydro power for the win!) carbon water you'd understand. I doubt it, but maybe.
 
Back
Top