Could the man who once occupied the Oval Office be entangled in a financial web of his own making? Settle in as we peel back the layers on Donald Trump's latest escapades, starting with a financial hail Mary that's as controversial as the man himself. We sink our teeth into the peculiarities surrounding the $175 million bond posted in a New York civil fraud case, a move bolstered by a financier from the murkier waters of subprime auto lending. The enigmatic relationship between Trump and this secretive benefactor, coupled with their alleged non-acquaintance, casts a dubious light on this financial maneuver, making for a story stranger than fiction.
Strap in for a rollercoaster ride through the tumultuous stock market saga of Trump Media and Technology Group. With numbers in a tailspin post-public filing, something doesn't quite compute when you balance their paltry revenue against staggering losses. We dissect the valuation perplexities and the baffling choice of a small-scale accounting firm for their financial audits, raising the stakes for investors riding the Truth Social hype. Juxtaposing this against the platform's user engagement, this chapter of Trump's narrative is a cautionary tale for those dazzled by big names and bigger promises.
Turning the spotlight on Trump's relentless combativeness, we examine the fallout from his abrasive legal tactics and the toxicity that seems to follow in his wake. From the curious case of Alina Habba to the echo of lawsuits against former allies, we're not just reporting the news; we're digging into the implications of Trump's approach to power. The judicial system's reluctance to rein him in, despite his repeated encouragement of supporter-led harassment, paints a troubling portrait of disparity in accountability. Join us as we navigate this maze of intrigue and ask the tough questions about the balance of power within the justice system.
Could the man who once occupied the Oval Office be entangled in a financial web of his own making? Settle in as we peel back the layers on Donald Trump's latest escapades, starting with a financial hail Mary that's as controversial as the man himself. We sink our teeth into the peculiarities surrounding the $175 million bond posted in a New York civil fraud case, a move bolstered by a financier from the murkier waters of subprime auto lending. The enigmatic relationship between Trump and this secretive benefactor, coupled with their alleged non-acquaintance, casts a dubious light on this financial maneuver, making for a story stranger than fiction.
Strap in for a rollercoaster ride through the tumultuous stock market saga of Trump Media and Technology Group. With numbers in a tailspin post-public filing, something doesn't quite compute when you balance their paltry revenue against staggering losses. We dissect the valuation perplexities and the baffling choice of a small-scale accounting firm for their financial audits, raising the stakes for investors riding the Truth Social hype. Juxtaposing this against the platform's user engagement, this chapter of Trump's narrative is a cautionary tale for those dazzled by big names and bigger promises.
Turning the spotlight on Trump's relentless combativeness, we examine the fallout from his abrasive legal tactics and the toxicity that seems to follow in his wake. From the curious case of Alina Habba to the echo of lawsuits against former allies, we're not just reporting the news; we're digging into the implications of Trump's approach to power. The judicial system's reluctance to rein him in, despite his repeated encouragement of supporter-led harassment, paints a troubling portrait of disparity in accountability. Join us as we navigate this maze of intrigue and ask the tough questions about the balance of power within the justice system.
one, two, three, four. Hey, this is d night this is carol.
Speaker 3:
This is ty listening to the pardon the interaction podcast through to do the podcast where we definitely all read the things this week we certainly did read the things this week, carol, or at least most of us on this podcast did.
Speaker 1:
But before we get to the things this week that we read, we have to give our obligatory shout out to our sponsor sheets and giggles. I I can't even remember how I sold the sheets on the last episode. Oh, I know what happened. I think I I was telling the audience how wonderfully soft and restorative and recuperative the sheets are, that even if you died and we laid you to rest and we wrapped you in those sheets, You'd be resurrected by the next episode.
Speaker 1:
There you go, you nailed it, carol, you're episode. There you go. You nailed it, carol, that is you nailed it, but I brought it back ah, I see what you did there. Probably sacrilegious and I'm going to hell, but that's okay as long as you get a set, a set of sheets for sheets and giggles there.
Speaker 3:
Sorry, we got it out of order, jesus died for you to get these sheets and then do the inappropriate joke.
Speaker 1:
Jesus died for you to get these sheets from sheetsand gigglescom, but obviously the week has not quite been so completely out of control or at least in comparison to last week.
Speaker 1:
If you caught the last episode, that was probably a fucking roller coaster which you were still recovering from. I know I am. It was a lot, lot packed into the last week. Uh, this week has been eventful as well. Uh and, and we'll just dive right in into this particular roller coaster. So, with three days to spare, trump finally posted the one hundred and seventy five million dollar bond in his New York civil fraud judgment. Kids, did you keep up with the ins and outs of that particular development by any chance?
Speaker 3:
I understand that he's paid it and he still owes the full amount.
Speaker 2:
You know what he did. It's like you know you're behind on your electric bill and they're like, okay, we're going to accept this partial payment here, but bet you still owe us, you know. So you pay it and it gets. You keeps your lights on, you know, temporarily, but the bill's still going to come due. But I don't know. I was reading somewhere that that guy, hanky, was saying like that he was actually in talks about paying it when it was the 464 million or whatever, and that he was the one that reached out to the trumps um eric reached out to him and he like yeah, I got you okay, so it's a it's.
Speaker 1:
Let's rewind here. So last week, at the last second, the appeals court reduced trump's bond from the 470 I I think it was 464 million actually, if you include the interest to a mere 175175 million bond in order to stay the enforcement of the judgment, to keep Fannie Willis from. Fannie Willis, that's Georgia. I'm turning into Fox News now.
Speaker 2:
All black people like to do.
Speaker 1:
Look if Fannie Willis is on my mind. There's a lot going on here. Just look if Fannie Willis is on my mind. There's a lot going on here. But no Letitia James. To basically forestall her from seizing Trump's properties, he still had to come up with one hundred seventy five million dollars in order to stay the judgment, and it turns out at the last minute. Here Monday, with a couple of days to spare, came up with the 100 million or 175 million dollar bond from well, a guy who largely made his fortune in subprime lending for auto.
Speaker 2:
He's the lawmaker of the auto industry.
Speaker 1:
Yes, exactly, he's got a lot in common with housing lenders who caused the 2008 financial collapse, except his business is largely centered around automobiles but, he's got a hand in another One of the companies who ended up insuring this bond for Trump.
Speaker 1:
a small portion of their business interest does include providing bonds, but nothing of like this is orders of magnitude above and beyond what that company typically deals in. So I can only imagine that, whatever the terms of the agreement are, we should be pretty fucking suspicious because this is just, I agree, and they're licensed in the Cayman Islands. Yeah, this is just wild. The CEO of this dude signed off on on the $175 million bond himself, hanky, but he's also got an ownership stake in this other company. I think it's. Is it Axios, axios?
Speaker 2:
No, not Axios, Axios.
Speaker 1:
I be reading Axios sometimes so it's also on the mind. But yes, he's got a hand in Axios Financial, who was also lending hundreds of billions of dollars to Trump in his other various properties. He helped him refinance his Trump Tower loan, the one the Deutsche Bank was like.
Speaker 2:
We got this bitch yeah, they don't even have a. They don't even have a branch. I'm bet you're just an online bank yes.
Speaker 1:
So everything surrounding this this last minute bailout from from this guy is is very suspicious, uh, and you would think, like, like you've already got hundreds of millions of dollars invested in in trump's properties, why would you come up with these 175 million dollars to bail him out at the last second? But I guess, like, if you've already got money like your pot committed at that point, you might as well follow through and try and save him. I don't know.
Speaker 2:
I'll look into his legal because I have a feeling that he made a deal with the Orange Devil because he got he's like you know what, I got something that's going to be coming up. So when you win, I'm going to need you to. You know, I'm going to need that pardon on deck.
Speaker 1:
So right Well something shady like that well, another thing that's awfully suspicious about this deal is um hanky, and, like they say, he says he's never met or spoken with donald trump, which seems pretty fucking insane, even though, like one, hanky's a super trump supporter. He's donated to the campaign.
Speaker 2:
He's his company one of his companies is largely responsible for these loans got the money to be hanging out at mar-a-lago to get the invite to the cookout you would think so it's.
Speaker 1:
It seems just fairly fucking impossible that the dude is willing to have gone to these lengths to rescue this guy and, like you said, ty, he has mentioned that he was the one who initiated um conversations surrounding the opportunity for his company to provide this bond. It's just, it's all suspect, like I would hope that journalists would please, for God's sakes, do your due diligence and dig around in this guy's financial goings and comings and the CEO of that company, greenberg, having ties to Dimitri Symes from the fucking Mueller investigation. There's no way that, if you don't, if you just like a dig beneath the surface in this arrangement, I'm sure you'll find something pretty fucking scandalous, because no one, I don't understand, there's no one that should have came to this rescue it's not good for it, like for real.
Speaker 2:
So they if you don't want money, you want something else, because everything is transactional and nobody is cutting for him just to be coming to his rescue like that because he's just this great, great, great guy. So that's always a good place to start, because that much we know is true.
Speaker 1:
And I think. Well, here's the thing. So obviously I think at this point you got to expect that, given the reduced bond, trump knew he would probably be able to come up with $175 million, even if he couldn't come up with the full $464 million, and he was probably scared to put his pennies together. And I'm sure he did manage to find a way to come up with the cash to secure the bond, because I believe the surety agreement was something like one-to-one in terms of having assets to back the bond, which probably means that he used $175 million worth of cash or some kind of liquid assets in order to secure the bond. Otherwise, if he had to use his property, uh, that probably would have been like two to one well, what he said was hanky.
Speaker 2:
He said that it was going to be an 80 20 deal, assets, 20 cash, 20 cash.
Speaker 1:
Oh, is that what he said?
Speaker 2:
trump came up with the cash ah got you.
Speaker 1:
Yeah, well, and that's the thing like Trump came up with the cash. Ah, got you.
Speaker 2:
Yeah, well, and that's the thing.
Speaker 1:
Like this is part of the problem, like in figuring all this shit out, like we have no idea what the fuck Trump actually has, because he lies all the fucking time. He said, like one day he says he can't come up with the money. The next day he says he's got $500 billion in cash money. The next day he says he's got 500 billion dollars in cash. Um, you know, in in court his lawyers say it's impossible to secure the bond. But they also file you know, they file documents in court stating that trump has 400 million dollars in cash. It's really just, it's impossible.
Speaker 1:
And then again, I'm sure with like trump's l, they probably have these clauses in these contracts that require him to have a certain amount of cash on hand, otherwise he'll be in violation of the loan terms. They can call his loans. I just it's, it's. It's so difficult to figure out what the state of affairs are with his finances. And you know what assets have, what encumbrances. It's just a fucking maze. But I can only imagine, given that we still have barbara jones overseeing the trump organization, at the very least, whatever fucking shenanigans he's trying to pull, he won't be able to get away with if they're criminal and if it's remotely sketchy, I'm sure she'll flag it and report it to the court.
Speaker 2:
So just expect more developments on that in the near future what would have been super cute is if he had to go begging to barbara like for allowance. Can I, can I get some of that?
Speaker 1:
yeah, he gotta go ask her. He would draw money from his account. But you know, look this. It wouldn't even be the first time that he's taking money out of the account without notifying her. Because he took out what was it like? Forty million or so to pay to pay his taxes last year without notifying Barbara Jones. She wasn't too pleased about that. I think he also took out money to pay the E Jean Carroll 2 lawsuit the $5 million judgment. She wasn't pleased with that and had to notify the court. No-transcript. Continue to give him a break with all of this shit is fucking bonkers. I don't understand how this dude who constantly engages in this kind of activity is constantly getting breaks is beyond me. Like no one in the history of the legal system has ever been given the benefit of the doubt in every turn like this guy. Kara, you okay over there, mm-hmm. Any thoughts that you would like to share perhaps?
Speaker 3:
No, no, I will try to. I will interject when I want to say something.
Speaker 1:
Oh, okay, all righty.
Speaker 3:
I think we should go to the next topic.
Speaker 2:
Yes, this is still about that fool, so we'll take.
Speaker 3:
And the next topic would be what I wasn't paying attention.
Speaker 1:
I don't know, I'm just.
Speaker 3:
Are we still talking about the bond?
Speaker 1:
We can move on if you want to, there's just I wasn't trying to push away no, it's just insane. Like this, the sanky dude and this company, night financial, which at least I'm fond of the name, uh, coming through the last second, it seems fucking shady. And the fact that he was negotiating to try and come with the 400, so it seems fucking shady in the fact that he was negotiating to try and come up with the 400.
Speaker 2:
And it's so dramatic because they were negotiating this shit back in March. So I feel like Trump was probably did it on purpose. He was probably like yo, bro, if you can get this down, I got you. And then it was the whole dramatic down to the wire because you know, everything with Trump is a fucking reality show and it's like I don't know. I think he knew if it was, he could get it.
Speaker 1:
He was playing game he definitely played a shell game with the court and they fell for it and they gave him exactly what he wanted and bailed him out. And again, like we talked about last week, make sure you pick up pick up a copy of tristan snell's book where he talks about how to hold trump accountable and, like the appeals court, did the exact opposite of what he suggests. You gotta yeah, you gotta draw a fucking hard line, otherwise he will squirm and find a way out and, like you, giving him a near 300 million dollar discount, they ain't never gonna see that money in that judgment. They're gonna get the 175 million because that's gonna be an escrow somewhere, but the rest of that money new york is never getting and that's going to be an escrow somewhere, but the rest of that money New York is never getting. And that's under the assumption that the appeals court does uphold the initial judgment.
Speaker 1:
I mean, I guess there's been a lot of speculation about the fact that because they've lowered the bond, that means they don't agree with the initial number and they're going to lower the judgment to $175 million. But the thing is, because the appeals court didn't put anything in their fucking judgment when they handed it down, like it's basically just saying hey, this is the conclusion we came to, with no explanation. Who the fuck knows what is going to happen in that regard? But yes, car on to the next subject here the Trump media and technology groups. Their stock price tanked by 21 percent in just one day after going public, after a public filing showed four million dollars in revenue in 2023, in losses of up to $58 million. Carol, do you have any thoughts on those developments?
Speaker 3:
I think it's I like. I'm wondering about the timing of that money appearing to Trump after his company lost.
Speaker 2:
Oh, after the dump you mean? That is a very good observation.
Speaker 3:
Or is it just that you know the bond was due and people lost comp? I don't know. I don't know. Anyway.
Speaker 1:
This is what happened. Well, so this is what happened with the Trump stock.
Speaker 1:
What had happened was after the initial day, after the launch, after it initially went public, uh, it was trading at a fairly high number. But then, of course, now that it's a publicly traded company like um, these filings have to be made public about the financial inner workings of the company. What is it like an 8K filing? So, typically, what happens with these companies after they go public and you get to see their inner workings, their financials? And there's a couple of ways that you can typically value these companies, and one way to do that generally is in multiples of revenue. So say, a company goes public and it's making a hundred million dollars in revenue a year, regardless of what his expenses are. You might look at that and be like, all right, well, maybe that company, depending on whatever area of business they focus on uh, you know what, whatever area of business they they focus on, that company might be worth two, three, maybe four or five times its revenue. So a company making a hundred million dollars with, with an ever growing, uh market cap, might be worth three, four, $500 million. Right, it's pretty straightforward math.
Speaker 1:
Well, truth Social, on the other hand, had a revenue of $4 million last year and even if you rack that valuation up by 10x, 10x. Whatever the revenue is. In Truth, social's case it's it made four million dollars. You'd you'd be gracious to give it that number that that make it worth 40 million dollars. Well, upon its basic basically an ipo. In this case it was a spec merger. Uh, the thing was valued at multiple billions of dollars, which is way fucking off. There's no company in the history Right.
Speaker 1:
There's no company in the history of companies that's launched with these kind of financials that's been valued at that number, which is totally fucking Elon.
Speaker 3:
Musk established like arbitrarily high and false values for fucking social media companies, and he bought twitter for like a. Well, that's. Therefore this one should also be that okay, but see the thing so well.
Speaker 1:
this kind of also applies to that right. So that was elon buying a publicly traded company and taking it private. But theoretically, what Elon did was value it at a reasonable multiple of not necessarily its revenue, but at least the stock price. He bought it for what? Almost three times more than what it was trading for. But again, if you think a company is super valuable and under different management it could become more profitable and therefore the stock price could increase once you take it public again, I mean that's not. Obviously we look at it now and I mean it was stupid at the time, but it wasn't like insane. He didn't buy it for like a thousand times more than the price it was trading for a thousand times more than its revenue. That's not what happened there. But also a company like True Social and this is insane, Like it's I get more impressions on twitter um than than true social gets unique visitors every month yeah, so 287 000 or something uh, I think it's, I get.
Speaker 1:
It gets like 3 million um unique visitors every month, but that's a really low number and then it's a million it's getting three million unique visitors every month.
Speaker 2:
That's not necessarily um people creating accounts well, it's also like your views and your actual clicks of.
Speaker 1:
Yeah, there you go their analytics on exactly, and the fact that it's barely like just for context, like again my my guys on Midas Touch they talk about how they get more unique visitors to their YouTube page over like a two-day period. Then this shit is getting in a month and there's no way that this shit is worth six, seven, $8 billion. And that's why the second, those financial statements, remain publicly available. The stock price sank because there aren't any real investors who are looking at that and being like, oh yeah, there's a way for me to make money on this by buying stock. Who were looking at that and being like, oh yeah, there's a way for me to make money on this by buying stock?
Speaker 1:
And if anything, the only real way to make money off of this thing for most people will be to short it. Otherwise it's like a Ponzi scheme, right? The only people who are going to make money are the people who cash out early. And another thing so the company who did the audit of True Social's financials is some rinky dink I really don't even know how to describe it Like. It's not quite strip mall level accounting, but it's like a building on a street behind a strip mall in Colorado.
Speaker 3:
Huh, they have their own building though.
Speaker 1:
They do have their own building and I've actually seen a picture of it Cause I pulled it up on Google maps just to see what it looked like, and it looks like that type of shit from four seasons.
Speaker 3:
No it wasn't quite like that, it was the four c's on third, the four c's.
Speaker 1:
they stand for um candy, candace, cadence, and um no, but it did look like something out of that movie. Have y'all seen that ben affleck movie the accountant?
Speaker 1:
it looks like that shit it's like it's like a single, it's like a firm with like a single employee and the dude runs his own firm and he's the person who audited their financial documents and it just like. It is so strange, like usually when these large companies launch, um, rather they're they're taken public in some kind of IPO. Uh, you know, you get a one of the handful of really large um accounting firms to to handle this process. Uh, I don't know what what you guys might be familiar with, but like there's a ernst young right down the street from me. So so they usually handle large ipos or or kpmg or something like that, something along along those lines, not some random dude who's like down the street from the o'reillys tucked's, tucked behind a strip mall with like the nail salon and like the Boba Tea place.
Speaker 2:
Oh my gosh. And the nail nail shop.
Speaker 1:
Right. It's very weird that they couldn't come up with like a legitimate firm to hand. Just all of this is so suspect, like and and again. So we got news today that the trump is actually suing his business partners partners, the co-founders, uh, who basically helped build the company for him. Uh, which is it's a development in a long saga of shady ass activity at the company, given that these guys sued him just a few Well, I guess it's been a little over a month now for Basically trying to prevent him from engaging in a scheme to dilute their shares so that upon launch, they would basically own none of the company. And and in court filings, trump's lawyers was like oh judge, come on, there's nothing like that going on here, we promise. And then, and immediately after the launch, trump is trying to sue those guys to take away their shares based on some some. I mean that, isn't he basically accusing them of running the company so poorly that it's not worth shit?
Speaker 2:
yes, that is exactly what he's saying yes, he's blaming him. So I mean, I just really now they I'm I have zero doubt that he did exactly what they accused him of doing, absolutely oh what trying to steal the shares from them?
Speaker 1:
basically by watering, yeah, diluting the shares absolutely.
Speaker 2:
And when that didn't work and they sued, because he probably thought they were such sycophants that he could just spoo them over like he does, regular MAGA, you know.
Speaker 1:
Well, can you name someone that's worked with Trump, that he hasn't stabbed in the back, like it's literally everyone right and you can just be literal? Well, not literal.
Speaker 2:
Well, right now I'm going to say Alina Haba, and that's because, wait, before you even get to Alina Haba, and that's because before you even get to Alina Haba, there's actually welcome back, carol.
Speaker 1:
So there's this. This is recent settlement between Trump and a former employee. It's basically another illegal hush money scheme, this one where.
Speaker 1:
Alina Haba where Alina Habba? This is how Alina Habba basically got her started representing Trump. She pretended to be friends with this lady and helped her sign an agreement to get her paid in exchange for not going public with her story. Except the payment was it was far beyond or far below what this lady should have been compensated and she basically she tricked her into it really to help trump out and like, so like yeah, and then yeah, well, trump settled, except like everyone is now absolved of responsibility in that settlement, except for for Alina Haba, leaving her open to a lawsuit.
Speaker 1:
So he kind of just stabbed her in the back too, yeah, but she's still dumb. Well, yeah, but that's what I'm saying. Like Trump is eventually going to stab everybody in the in the back, whether that's Alina Haba or or Mike Pence.
Speaker 3:
Even when he just got rid of the only lawyer who was one of the only lawyers who hasn't been disbarred yet who's still representing him. Yeah, If you get your lawyer in trouble, it's not good.
Speaker 1:
I mean he stabbed Kevin McCarthy in the back. He sued Deutsche Bank once because he didn't pay them what they were owed. Like he lies to, he's lied to all of his lenders, of course. Like would they just prove that in court here?
Speaker 2:
he always uses the same line every time he steps somebody well, you know, I wouldn't pay for that work, that work was shitty or that he always uses that same line always. It's always the same thing and everybody goes. Well, yeah, I mean, I would they all, it's always the same and it's the same, it's like a similar scheme. Well, yeah, I mean, I would they all, it's always the same.
Speaker 1:
And it's the same, it's like a similar scheme with what he pulled with the New York Appeals Court to get his bond lowered. He's just always fucking finding a way to just just. It's insane, it's sociopathic the lengths that he'll go to. But yeah, suing, suing the people who basically just made him billions of dollars on paper in order to try and get what little bit of the company they owe, they own, rather so like it's like half a, it's half a billion maybe. Maybe what he's trying to do is he's trying to suit him to get what he owes for the rest of the new york civil fraud trial judgment. I don't know no, no, it's.
Speaker 3:
You know that's what you do. You'll find the next what he needs at the time. Can't think of the word. It's like a Ponzi scheme, but with your own finances, I think it's just.
Speaker 2:
I don't know he's addicted to, it's just anything that'll keep him in the news. I think he makes it, thinks it makes him seem like a tough guy. Oh, I think he thinks it makes him seem like a tough guy, like, oh, he doesn't take no shit, he's gonna shoot like or cause every time when magas get all, they get all pre-cummy in their boxers. When somebody does something like, ooh Elon's gonna sue you into, ooh, trump is gonna sue like they get all excited about, like that. And I think that he literally thinks it makes him look like some kind of you know tough guy or something that no, I don't take no mess and I'm going to take you to court. He walks around with this entourage of legal eagles quote, unquote around him, when really it's just like the guy that he picked up outside of 7-Eleven and gave him a suit and everything else, like he's just fucking ridiculous and I mean he should be really should be held accountable more for this bullshit and for wasting our judicial system's time yeah.
Speaker 1:
But I mean, look, judges, just they don't want to. They don't want to hold him accountable, no matter what the fuck it is he's doing in nearly every instance. But I guess we have yet another example of that money election interference case issued a gag order against Trump last week, preventing him from making any disparaging comments about, like court staff and the clerks.
Speaker 3:
And how have those all been working so far?
Speaker 1:
Well, so well. Trump immediately began to violate that order last week by attacking Judge Merchan's daughter. So Alvin Bragg made a court filing yesterday, monday, asking the judge to expand the gag order to include family members of the DA and the judge to make sure that Trump knew that that was beyond what was allowable by the gag order. And Trump violated that gag the expanded gag order again today on true social by pinning a post to his account where a Fox news host basically attacked Judge Merchan's daughter over the same fake claims that Trump used to justify his attacks on Merchan's daughter last week. So not not going great kids.
Speaker 2:
Look, the way I feel is that if you have to institute a gag order, it's already too late. Have to institute a gag order is already too late. Like was that? Like, if you have to get to that point where you have to issue a gag order, that negative, that toxicity is always in, is already in the atmosphere.
Speaker 1:
So you're kind of you're pulling up the rear on this one yeah, but the thing is, if you want to hold trump accountable, at least in terms of like, threatening potential jurors because that's really what he's doing Right, you know, there's no way that he making these statements about Merchan's daughter is going to shake Merchan do is. It sends a message to witnesses and potential jurors that, hey, if Trump can go after the judge's daughter like this and the judge can't do anything about it, what's to stop that from happening to some random person who's just sitting on the jury or someone who's going to testify against him? If the judge can't protect his own family, how you gonna protect them? And like, the only way you can really reconcile that issue is to make sure the terms of the gag order are clear. And then, when he violates the gag order, you gotta punish his ass and in this case, like a couple thousand dollars in fines. Ain't gonna do it. You're gonna have to put his ass in pre-trial detention for at least a couple of days.
Speaker 1:
And again, as I just stated, he, immediately after having the gag order expanded and clarified to include murchon's daughter and family members of of the judge and the da trump couldn't help him fucking self. Couldn't help him his fucking self. A habitual line, stepper uh at his finest, like the my small child yep, and he's gonna and he's got to see where the line is and then he's got to cross it.
Speaker 1:
And if you, if you, don't hammer it, then he will just continue to cross the line and create issues and it will have, you know, unforeseen consequences. And the only thing the judge can really do at this point is be like hey, man, I just fucking told you, now you've crossed the line again, gotta put your, put your ass in lockup. But again, this is going to be another issue where Trump's not going to be held responsible for his bad behavior. He's going to get away with it and then he's going to continue to engage in more bad behavior. It's going to have.
Speaker 3:
I would love to see we said that until before he was charged with anything. Let's see. Let's see. This will be the first judge to lock him up over violating a gag order. Come on, fingers crossed. Yeah, we can hope.
Speaker 1:
We have so little else to live for, so just let us have this well, here's the thing I don't think Merchan will, or at least not over this most recent incident with the post on True Social. And then you've got. It's not like we don't have evidence of trump being a stochastic terrorist and at every turn, especially when it involves the legal system, holding him accountable like every single judge except for one, in all of his various cases, whether it be civil or criminal, has faced some kind of threats, some some kind of harassment, you know uh like judging Gorin had to.
Speaker 1:
No, rather, I'm sorry the judge in the Georgia Rico trial had to wait days before handing out his judgment. That kept finding Willis on the case because he had to get security in place because he knew he was going to receive death threats Like some. Someone just got arrested earlier today for sending um threats, basically to kill Letitia James, and um, um, uh, who was the judge overseeing that? Kill Letitia James? And judging Goran? If Letitia James sees any of Trump's properties like, it's just it's fucking bananas and I mean look the whole reason that Bonnie Willis went with you know.
Speaker 2:
I mean look the whole reason that Bonnie Willis went with you know, wade was because nobody else would take the job Like he was literally a last resort for her it wasn't like OK, well, I got this cushy job for you.
Speaker 1:
You don't know Like she literally went to everyone that she could think of to be the special counsel on this case and they were like no yeah, even the former governor, right, because she asked him if he wanted, if he would join, uh, the prosecution's team as a special prosecutor and he was, like you know, I lived for years, um, with like a private security detail and I didn't want to live that way for the rest of my life and that's why I turned down the job and like again you know that was one of the issues was trying to prove some kind of untoward activity in her relationship with wade is like he wasn't her first choice or her.
Speaker 2:
Second choice or her third choice that's a hard ass. People have watched you for two years. Have to increase security, face threats, death threats, you in your office. So for you to call up somebody be like how you doing you want to come help me.
Speaker 1:
I mean, if you zoom out, really like a lot of trump's adversaries just over the past near decade here, like him using his platform to direct his supporters uh, to attack and harass and threaten and intimidate other people. Like it's it's been a multi-year pattern and like it's nothing new. And like we also have to keep in context that this is a dude who brought his supporters to dc and told them to go attack the Capitol and they did it Big cops who didn't have no problem with it, who were trying to blow up shit.
Speaker 1:
And I feel like judges treat this dude like he exists in a vacuum. We're only taking into account the things he does. In this particular case, if you look at his behavior, like just in totality, like there's absolutely no reason to give this dude a break in any way, shape or fashion and this ain't me talking, I know you probably listen.
Speaker 1:
He's like oh, you just hate trump. Well, okay, like I can put, like I can be objective in this particular instance and set aside my personal feelings for this dude and his politics, cause it's more than just that. But like no one else would be getting treated like this, like if I was talking shit about a judge's daughter and posting it on on the Twitter with my couple hundred thousand followers and doing all of this crazy shit, I would be in pre-trial detention right now. Bond revoked, my black ass would be locked up.
Speaker 3:
Look, there'd be a hashtag going for you in no time, right. Hashtag free the D.
Speaker 1:
Well, you know, Carol, as much as I would like to free the D, I'm not. Jeffrey Tubin Can't be doing that over the Zoom here.