Trump owes Jean Carroll $83 million. Will he actually pay a cent of it?
My guess is that he will stiff her, just like he does everyone else. Except this is a judicial penalty, so it may be more difficult to try and evade.
How long will it take her to see a dime from criminal Trump?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
70 Answers
Of course he will stiff her.
He says he is going to appeal, but from what I have read, in order to appeal, he would first have to post bond in the amount of the rendered judgement. Since he would lose that appeal, he would not get that money back, so it is questionable if he will appeal, instead of just complaining and not paying.
If he can’t milk his base for the bill, can he declare bankruptcy to absolve him of this debt?
And to answer your question he will do everything he possibly can to NOT pay.
According to the Washington Post: Trump has already given the $5 million he was ordered to pay in damages in last year’s Carroll trial to the federal court in New York, where it is being held while Trump’s appeal of that case is litigated.
The court has the ability and inclination to freeze his assets until a Final ruling.
The likelihood of successful appeals is small, and the money will be held by the court or in bond.
Here’s an article by the New York Times about that. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/26/nyregion/trump-carroll-pay-83-million.html#:~:text=Mr.%20Trump%20can%20pay%20the,the%20full%20amount%20up%20front.
This is from that: “ Mr. Trump can pay the $83.3 million to the court, which will hold the money while the appeal is pending. This is what he did last year when a jury ordered him to pay Ms. Carroll $5.5 million in a related case. Or, Mr. Trump can try to secure a bond, which will save him from having to pay the full amount up front.
A bond might require him to pay a deposit and offer collateral, and would come with interest and fees. It would also require Mr. Trump to find a financial institution willing to lend him a large sum of money at a time when he is in significant legal jeopardy.“
@SQUEEKY2 he can’t declare bankruptcy , it would show he is a LOSER !
@SQUEEKY2 Due to the type of lawsuit, declaring bankruptcy won’t save him from paying her although I think he will find another way to get out of paying her. With the way his mind works, he’s planning on dragging it out until he becomes president again & then he will have Seal Team 6 take care of the problem because she is a threat to national security!!!
No wonder why he wants that immunity thing.^
@SQUEEKY2 I would like to see him declare immunity only for 45 and no others.
He’s probably thinking he can delay stuff till he becomes president and then he can pardon himself, only pardons are for federal crimes. I think this is civil.
He has to put REAL money to appeal. . . like 65 million dollars. @Pandora !
I suspect this verdict will be appealed. And it is likely that the entire thing will be thrown out on appeal. I just heard that Trump’s team just found out that Judge Kaplan used to be Roberta Kaplan’s (no relation) mentor at a high brow law firm. Roberta Kaplan was the lead counsel for Carroll. This is a problem because this relationship was not mentioned up front by either the Judge or the attorney. That is ethically wrong. They are supposed to reveal any potential conflicts of interest up front, not keep it hidden and hope no one finds out.
As usual, the more time that goes by, the more of the underhanded actions of the Dems comes to light.
Wow. She worked for him 30, read THIRTY years ago, and you think that is a conflict of interest. You really are insane.
This case has nothing to do with politics,shit wulfie your hate is showing through, and your beloved is going through this because he couldn’t keep his big mouth shut.
@ragingloli Yet they had a close working relationship. So why not identify it up front? If it was 30 years ago, it should be able to be dealt with, right? But to not disclose it shows an ethical lapse.
@SQUEEKY2 These cases have to do with nothing BUT politics. And what did he say? After the first kangaroo court he said “I disagree with this verdict. I never did anything to Ms Carroll”. How is that defamatory? He is maintaining his innocence…the innocence that was never really voided. He was never charged. There was never any investigation. There were no witnesses, her own testimony told a very disjointed, unbelievable story, there was no physical evidence…nothing. She even tried bringing in the dress she was wearing when it supposedly happened and that got shot down because the dress hadn’t even been made when she said it happened. It was strictly a he said/she said civil lawsuit.
To suggest he cannot continue to deny the irrationality of the decision is a free speech issue, not defamatory. Hell, there are even prisoners on death row that continue to claim their innocence. Should they be sued for defamation if they do so? And what if they legitimately were innocent? Just shut up and do your time even though you didn’t earn it?
@seawulf575 Seems to me they have to do with rape and defamation. The others have to do with sedition, inciting a riot, trying to fraudulently overturn an election, stealing and distributing to foreign agents classified documents with US military intelligence, etc.
The sub-human here is the defendant, not the courts, prosecutors, investigators, rape victims, etc.
@seawulf575 This case was NOT about politics at all. Please do not demoralize this woman further.
I suspect Trump will never pay a dime.
^Exactly! I hope wulf never has a relative that is raped.
There are more than one here who feel that way..
@Tropical_Willie Nah, he doesn’t pay his lawyers. Its why they always have to turn around and sue him.
Lawyers have been asking for “Upfront” money ! @Pandora
His most recent lawyer, Ms Habba, was a poor excuse for an attorney. What a screw-up she is. Whatever he is paying her, Trump is being ripped off.
@Forever_Free And yet it really wasn’t about defamation either. Face it, she wasn’t going to even bring up the first case until rich Never-Trumpers offered to pay for it all. Sorry, it was ALWAYS about politics. I know you don’t want to admit it. Yet weren’t you one of the ones claiming Trump was trying to use the presidency to get an investigation into Biden, his chief political rival? Funny how one false accusation against Trump (demonstrated to be false) was given so much credibility, isn’t it? Just like much of these things.
I don’t believe Carroll’s story from the start. Normal, sane people wouldn’t. But Lefties with TDS don’t care to even evaluate it. They just see an accusation against Trump, call it truth and go from there. Cases like this are brought in NY because they have been loyal enough to the left so Trump cannot get a fair trial. Same with DC. I saw a recent poll of people in DC, concerning their opinions of Trump or Biden. Lots of questions that all came down to one answer: given any opportunity they would screw Trump if they could. So let me ask: given a law system that is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty and equal justice for all, if you have a jury pool that is 95% against the defendant for no other reason than what they have been told by the media, how can that result in a fair trial?
Wulfie when EJ won the first case ,all Trump had to do was not defame (<sue me if I spelled that wrong) her again and he couldn’t help himself,now you say it’s all a dem ploy to get Trump?
HE DID IT TO HIMSELF! weather you believe it or not.
It’s like when he mocked that handicapped reporter then totally denies it, gee if that wasn’t Trump mocking that reporter it sure looked like him.
Guess that was a trick by the evil left wing media huh?
@SQUEEKY2 What did he do? He claimed his innocence. Saying you are innocent doesn’t defame anyone. And I notice you entirely ignore anything other than the claim your lefty narrative gives you and then you try to deflect. The entire thing is a sham and is designed to interfere with the 2024 election. Too bad you guys only believe in election interference when you want to accuse Trump of it.
@seawulf575: He called her a “liar” and a “whack job” in a deposition, then defended the statement. That is defamatory. You can look it up.
He has power, what he says has power. This is not a difficult concept to understand. And yet you seem to want to believe that he’s being persecuted unjustly by everyone in the legal system. If you have children (that you could, of course, prove that they carried your DNA) I shudder to think that you raised them to believe that the bully who mocks everyone is the good guy.
@seawulf575 Shall I remind you that he was found guilty by a jury of his peers. Also don’t divert.
Former President Donald Trump must pay writer E. Jean Carroll over $83 million in damages for repeatedly defaming her, a jury found Friday.
The nine-person jury began deliberations in federal court in New York at 1:40 p.m. ET and reached a verdict in just under three hours.
What more do you need?
@seawulf575 Your hero is a fat, sloppy bully. He can’t stop running his mouth to safe his receiving monetary penalties.
Engooron is going to rip his sleazy (“morally bad and low in quality, but trying to attract people by a showy appearance or false manner: He’s a sleazy politician who ignored his responsibilities in order to make his friends rich. (Definition of sleazy from the Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary © Cambridge University Press))” heart out when Engoron sets the @\$250 million to $370 million fine .
He can appeal but has to put up the penalty money or find someone to bond for 80%, he has to pay bond person 20% ( if had the money to bond him it would 25% CASH) !
“Jury of his peers” is why appellate courts hesitate to overturn jury verdicts. Because doing so would make a mockery of the jury trial system and makes people hesitate to serve on juries.
But who are his peers? There isn’t a possibility of finding 12 multi-billionaire ex-presidents who have orange skin to serve on the jury.
@elbanditoroso No doubt! I am guessing there’s some caveat that there are exceptions – someone like a billionaire like Trump or Jeffrey Epstein is not going to find a “peer” in the average jury pool.
Putin should be on the jury . .(and get him for war crimes) ! !
@Forever_Free How about a fair trial instead of a kangaroo court? In what trial does a judge demand the defense tell him in advance what questions they will ask and what, exactly, their client will answer? And then edit the questions and answers to fit his liking? And then threaten them with contempt if they dare to say anything else? Sorry, it is a sham.
@seawulf575 This is commonplace courtroom practice. Sorry, that’s how it goes even if you don’t agree.
@seawulf575 trump doesn’t know how to follow the rules of a courtroom and neither does his lawyer. They have to be schooled in how the judicial system works or trump would turn it into a three ring circus by begging for votes and calling all the people involved names. He’s an 8 year old bully.
@Forever_Free Please, show a citation. I’ve never heard of such nonsense. I’ve heard of judges stopping a line of questioning in open court, but never telling a defense team they have to provide all questions and answers to those questions prior to going to open court. Nor have I heard of the judge editing said questions and responses and telling the defense that is all they are allowed to say. If you are saying that is commonplace, you should be able to show in a citation how that is legal.
@seawulf575 Trump has a habit of running off at the mouth (asking for donations, bad mouthing people he doesn’t like and trying to add spin to his lies) !
All not relevant to the case!
His lawyer is a real estate lawyer for closings on property and reading & writing rental agreements – - she is not a trial lawyer and it shows !
“bad mouthing people he doesn’t like and trying to add spin to his lies”
Sounds similar in style here. (Not a reference to you @tropical)
Just because our sage Mr @seawulf575 hasn’t heard of something does not make it a fact. I think that those of us who don’t read right-wing propaganda (i.e. those of us who DO read mainstream media), know exactly what is being referred to.
Let me suggest, @S, that you broaden your reading matter so that you can put things in context.
@elbanditoroso ^THIS Can I get an AMEN!
“Democracy Dies in Darkness” – WP
@elbanditoroso It’s interesting because I do read all sorts of things, right and left. I believe in getting a solid picture. But what I find is that most of the stuff on the left puts forth opinions as facts. This is a fine example. A claim is made and when asked for a citation, the lefties come out of the wood work to avoid actually having to do so, yet they swear it is a fact.
Yes, there are articles and outlets on the right that also offer up opinion as fact. And I treat those the same as I do the left. If you ever notice, I tend to give citations that go back to some solid fact. I dislike sites that offer an opinion and then cite another opinion as their basis for calling it a fact. Or worse yet, a site that offers up another opinion piece from their own site as proof of validity.
So you stepped into this, go ahead and show me the citation that shows the behavior I described, that which happened in the Trump defamation case, happens all the time. The behavior of the judge asking and editing defense questions and witness answers prior to entering open court. I’ll wait.
As far as Trump’s courtroom behavior, if I remember correctly (just if my memory serves me, haven’t researched it, don’t have links but you know I love to provide links), Trump was shut down in the courtroom because he was rambling on. He was grandstanding and making it all about him. He was going on and on, and that’s not how people are supposed to behave in court – not the defendant, not the attorneys, not anyone. He was defaming E. Jean Carroll right in court, but not from the witness stand. He was calling her a liar, not from the witness stand but right in his chair next to his attorneys. He was going on and on and on. Nobody has time for that. Think if it was a rape trial or a murder trial, and the defendant, not on the witness stand but just sitting in the courtroom, started calling the accuser a liar? That would never be allowed. I think, if i remember correctly, that in addition to that, he was huffing and puffing and acting like a juvenile. All witnesses (including the Defendant) have their time to talk, and that is sitting on the witness stand, where they can be cross examined if necessary. Just sitting in the court room and yelling things out is not allowed in any court.
But @jca2 Trump is special he doesn’t have to follow court procedures.
@SQUEEKY2 I know! It comes from growing up coddled and entitled. He has the mentality of a 2 year old.
@jca2 Take a look at what Alina Habba had to say right after the trial when the corrupt judge’s rules no longer applied. At about 2:27 of the video she describes exactly what I am saying. If you are okay with kangaroo courts, more power to you. I think you are a fool because they will eventually impact you, but you are allowed to believe whatever you like. But let me ask: How is the treatment E. Jean Carroll has gotten from Trump differ from the treatment Tara Reade got from Biden and the Dems? She claimed the assault when it happened. She told her mom. Her mom talked to Larry King on air about it. And nothing was done. When she brought it up again when he was running for POTUS, she was silenced by the Dems and the complicit media. And nothing in her story has changed at all. Talk about defamation!!
https://youtu.be/OTzjmUYFIhI?t=1349
“And why is that? It’s because she’s going astray so many times. And he had to reign her in. Because we’re not going into that. You can’t just go and ask whatever you want to ask. It has to be relevant to the cause of action at hand.
So if all of a sudden he was going to get onto the stand, I mean he was only on the stand for 5 minutes anyway, he was going to go off on how “he didn’t know her” and “he never touched her” and all of that stuff, that wasn’t part of this trial, that had already happened.
So the judge didn’t trust her, didn’t trust trump, and gave them every opportunity to try this case they wanted to, but they went afoul of his orders at every turn.”
– Bruce Rivers, Criminal Defense Lawyer.
@Tropical_Willie And you can be damned sure that she knew that all along, and only ragged on about it now, so she can feed the slop to the rabid mad red hatters.
Had she brought it up during the trial, and asked the judge to recuse himself, she would have been met with a single word reply: “Denied.”
@ragingloli Sooo…in Germany, does a defense attorney have to tell the judge before going into court what questions they will ask and what answers the witness will give? And does the judge get to edit both of those? If so, I hope you go to court as a defendant sometime. Let’s see how fair you think it is. Sounds like the Judge is being both defense counsel and witness in the trial to me. He’s scripting the entire trial.
So you don’t like that a Judge put your hero in “Time-out” in public !
@Tropical_Willie No, I don’t like that judges are turning our judicial system into a mockery that even 3rd world countries would avoid. Not that I expect you to get past your Trump Derangement long enough to consider that.
You don’t like decorum, civility and truth.
Just anarchy and chaos with your hero spreading verbal diarrhea with his followers lapping it Up.
A courtroom with a judge is there to follow truth and evidence not lies and . .
and ‘they’re all against me!” which is your hero’s MO!
The mockery in the courtroom was when Trump started mouthing off without stopping. Typical undiplomatic behavior that Trump lovers love. They say “He has no filter and that’s why I like him.” Meanwhile, in a courtroom, there’s certain behavior that is expected of everyone, (along with certain clothing, etc. Anybody see “My Cousin Vinny” when Joe Pesce shows up in uncourtroom-like clothing?). The “players” speak when spoken to, they don’t ramble on, it’s not a campaign opportunity, and they don’t make comments about the accusing party being a liar, etc.
The Judge was trying to rein him in. It’s almost impossible to rein Trump in. “No filter! That’s why we like him” is what I hear over and over and over. It’s like a toddler who has had too much sugar.
^And he’s getting worse. He needs a mental evaluation from an unbiased doctor.
@chyna, he would claim that any doctor who deemed him Not Stable Genius would be persecuting him for only political reasons.
Anyone else pulling the kind of shit the orangutan and his help pull in court, would end up in jail and fined for contempt of court. If anything, the courts are coddling him by tolerating his BS as much as they do. The guy walked out of the courtroom during the closing argument of the plaintiff, and his lawyer tried repeatedly to bring in documents that were not previously entered into evidence, so much that she was ripped by the judge and told to read up on the rules of evidence.
It is crazy how much they get away with, and still his brain dead acolytes scream “kangaroo court”.
Ms Habba ,might have screwed his chance of an appeal, by not objecting to anything during the trial, according to a lawyer who was on the news.
@SQUEEKY2
On a podcast she said she would rather be pretty than smart, because she can fake being smart.
Well, obviously, she can not.
Ms. Habba might’ve strengthened his appeal by his claiming she was ineffectual council.
Ms. Habba was more interested in posing for the paparazzi with her fish lips on.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
