January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, if Rudolph the red nosed reindeer kicks the bucket, it might be easier for these plaintiffs to collect against his estate. But, yeah, at best they are only going to get cents on the dollar. Rudy wasn’t a trillionaire like his idol, Lord Donald of Queens.

You can't get blood from a stone. If Rudy doesn't have any money how do the plaintiffs get paid? That is after years and years of appeals. They certainly won a significant moral victory that will never find it's way into their bank account.

What is your basis for saying they won’t receive any money?

Two reasons, the appeals process has to run it's course. Then at the end of all that how much of Rudy's net worth will he have hidden? Or he could do what I would probably do...I would take an extended trip to Las Vegas and go on a world class gambling binge. I wouldn't have a penny left to my name by the time I was done. That is vindictiveness at its finest. IMO Rudee looks like a pathetic, feeble old man. A sad climax for a man whose leadership during 9/11 as mayor of NYC was inspirational to everyone who lived through those traumatic days.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Actually, if Rudolph the red nosed reindeer kicks the bucket, it might be easier for these plaintiffs to collect against his estate. But, yeah, at best they are only going to get cents on the dollar. Rudy wasn’t a trillionaire like his idol, Lord Donald of Queens.

You can't get blood from a stone. If Rudy doesn't have any money how do the plaintiffs get paid? That is after years and years of appeals. They certainly won a significant moral victory that will never find it's way into their bank account.

What is your basis for saying they won’t receive any money?

Two reasons, the appeals process has to run it's course. Then at the end of all that how much of Rudy's net worth will he have hidden? Or he could do what I would probably do...I would take an extended trip to Las Vegas and go on a world class gambling binge. I wouldn't have a penny left to my name by the time I was done. That is vindictiveness at its finest. IMO Rudee looks like a pathetic, feeble old man. A sad climax for a man whose leadership during 9/11 as mayor of NYC was inspirational to everyone who lived through those traumatic days.

How does the appeals process running out support the idea that the plaintiffs won’t receive any money? If there were more appeals their likelihood of receiving money would be enhanced? How would that work?

[Kismet]

He supposedly has a fancy house in Manhattan, which I’ve heard is up for sale. What these plaintiffs will do is register their judgment in New York as soon as they can (very simple process; just paperwork), which I think is either 10 or 30 days after the judgment is entered. Can’t remember which. They then can put a lien on that house. Whether they would get paid when the house is sold depends on the house’s value and the extent of any prior liens. Don’t know any of those details.

The fact that Rudy appeals does not prevent the plaintiffs from going after his assets during the appeal, although Rudy can avoid having his assets attached if he posts a supersedeas bond on appeal. I was always thrilled if my judgment debtor did that because it insured I would get paid after the appeal. Frankly, I don’t think Rudy could get a bond to cover the entire judgment, unless it is significantly reduced by the trial court or unless a friend of his has significant collateral they are willing to put up.

You all missed Bill's other post about the judgment and appeals - quoted above.
Bankruptcy also isn't a solution for Mayor Colludy

[MDlaxfan76]

All the body language from their lawyers post verdict was that they aren't done with suits...expecting them to go after other pockets of dough with Trump being certainly one possibility. Perhaps Fox or other outlets who promoted the claims multiple times.

I don't recall exactly what Trump said about them and how many times he made comments, tweets, but that could well be interesting.

Rudy was just so out there, repeatedly...whatever he has or can make going forward will be heading the way of the mother and daughter and their lawyers, absent a settlement. I'd think it would be very difficult to find a lawyer willing to represent him going forward.

Frankly, I'm not so sure he is long for this world.

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, if Rudolph the red nosed reindeer kicks the bucket, it might be easier for these plaintiffs to collect against his estate. But, yeah, at best they are only going to get cents on the dollar. Rudy wasn’t a trillionaire like his idol, Lord Donald of Queens.

You can't get blood from a stone. If Rudy doesn't have any money how do the plaintiffs get paid? That is after years and years of appeals. They certainly won a significant moral victory that will never find it's way into their bank account.

What is your basis for saying they won’t receive any money?

Two reasons, the appeals process has to run it's course. Then at the end of all that how much of Rudy's net worth will he have hidden? Or he could do what I would probably do...I would take an extended trip to Las Vegas and go on a world class gambling binge. I wouldn't have a penny left to my name by the time I was done. That is vindictiveness at its finest. IMO Rudee looks like a pathetic, feeble old man. A sad climax for a man whose leadership during 9/11 as mayor of NYC was inspirational to everyone who lived through those traumatic days.

How does the appeals process running out support the idea that the plaintiffs won’t receive any money? If there were more appeals their likelihood of receiving money would be enhanced? How would that work?

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, if Rudolph the red nosed reindeer kicks the bucket, it might be easier for these plaintiffs to collect against his estate. But, yeah, at best they are only going to get cents on the dollar. Rudy wasn’t a trillionaire like his idol, Lord Donald of Queens.

You can't get blood from a stone. If Rudy doesn't have any money how do the plaintiffs get paid? That is after years and years of appeals. They certainly won a significant moral victory that will never find it's way into their bank account.

What is your basis for saying they won’t receive any money?

Two reasons, the appeals process has to run it's course. Then at the end of all that how much of Rudy's net worth will he have hidden? Or he could do what I would probably do...I would take an extended trip to Las Vegas and go on a world class gambling binge. I wouldn't have a penny left to my name by the time I was done. That is vindictiveness at its finest. IMO Rudee looks like a pathetic, feeble old man. A sad climax for a man whose leadership during 9/11 as mayor of NYC was inspirational to everyone who lived through those traumatic days.

How does the appeals process running out support the idea that the plaintiffs won’t receive any money? If there were more appeals their likelihood of receiving money would be enhanced? How would that work?

Supposedly Rudee is already flat broke. At the end of the appeals process if Rudee ain't got no money how do the plaintiffs get paid?? I'll say it again, you can't get blood from a stone. It is an impressive moral victory for these 2 ladies. I don't believe they will ever see one single dime.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Actually, if Rudolph the red nosed reindeer kicks the bucket, it might be easier for these plaintiffs to collect against his estate. But, yeah, at best they are only going to get cents on the dollar. Rudy wasn’t a trillionaire like his idol, Lord Donald of Queens.

You can't get blood from a stone. If Rudy doesn't have any money how do the plaintiffs get paid? That is after years and years of appeals. They certainly won a significant moral victory that will never find it's way into their bank account.

What is your basis for saying they won’t receive any money?

Two reasons, the appeals process has to run it's course. Then at the end of all that how much of Rudy's net worth will he have hidden? Or he could do what I would probably do...I would take an extended trip to Las Vegas and go on a world class gambling binge. I wouldn't have a penny left to my name by the time I was done. That is vindictiveness at its finest. IMO Rudee looks like a pathetic, feeble old man. A sad climax for a man whose leadership during 9/11 as mayor of NYC was inspirational to everyone who lived through those traumatic days.

How does the appeals process running out support the idea that the plaintiffs won’t receive any money? If there were more appeals their likelihood of receiving money would be enhanced? How would that work?

Supposedly Rudee is already flat broke. At the end of the appeals process if Rudee ain't got no money how do the plaintiffs get paid?? I'll say it again, you can't get blood from a stone. It is an impressive moral victory for these 2 ladies. I don't believe they will ever see one single dime.

Those are the words I was looking for.

[cradleandshoot]

Actually, if Rudolph the red nosed reindeer kicks the bucket, it might be easier for these plaintiffs to collect against his estate. But, yeah, at best they are only going to get cents on the dollar. Rudy wasn’t a trillionaire like his idol, Lord Donald of Queens.

You can't get blood from a stone. If Rudy doesn't have any money how do the plaintiffs get paid? That is after years and years of appeals. They certainly won a significant moral victory that will never find it's way into their bank account.

What is your basis for saying they won’t receive any money?

Two reasons, the appeals process has to run it's course. Then at the end of all that how much of Rudy's net worth will he have hidden? Or he could do what I would probably do...I would take an extended trip to Las Vegas and go on a world class gambling binge. I wouldn't have a penny left to my name by the time I was done. That is vindictiveness at its finest. IMO Rudee looks like a pathetic, feeble old man. A sad climax for a man whose leadership during 9/11 as mayor of NYC was inspirational to everyone who lived through those traumatic days.

How does the appeals process running out support the idea that the plaintiffs won’t receive any money? If there were more appeals their likelihood of receiving money would be enhanced? How would that work?

Supposedly Rudee is already flat broke. At the end of the appeals process if Rudee ain't got no money how do the plaintiffs get paid?? I'll say it again, you can't get blood from a stone. It is an impressive moral victory for these 2 ladies. I don't believe they will ever see one single dime.

Those are the words I was looking for.

I hope these ladies see every penny they been granted to them. The legal system in our country isn't designed to accommodate expediency. It is more like a slow, ambling river that takes years to find it's way out to sea. Unless Rudee makes a side deal with these ladies and he doesn't seem to be repentant in any way, the appeals process will begin.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Giuliani cannot repent, because it would counter his tough guy, Mob-killer brand to the folks dribbling out their cash to support him. He effectively conceded liability here, and the trial — in which the tough guy didn’t testify — was solely about damages. I think these women and their lawyers will hound him to the grave. Payment enough for me for the damage he did to our country.

[cradleandshoot]

Giuliani cannot repent, because it would counter his tough guy, Mob-killer brand to the folks dribbling out their cash to support him. He effectively conceded liability here, and the trial — in which the tough guy didn’t testify — was solely about damages. I think these women and their lawyers will hound him to the grave. Payment enough for me for the damage he did to our country.

If Rudee had ended his story as Mayor of NYC during 9/11 he would deserve the respect he earned during that period of time. He found a different calling and chose a different political path. He is just one more pile of debris left in the wake of the trump tidal wave.

[jhu72]

Giuliani cannot repent, because it would counter his tough guy, Mob-killer brand to the folks dribbling out their cash to support him. He effectively conceded liability here, and the trial — in which the tough guy didn’t testify — was solely about damages. I think these women and their lawyers will hound him to the grave. Payment enough for me for the damage he did to our country.

... I thought I heard from some talking head lawyer that if Rudy doesn't pay the court could decide to have him do some jail time. I realize this is not normal for a civil conviction, but how would that work? Any idea? Would this just be the case of he has the money but just refuses to pay?? So I take it the lawyers have priority in getting at Rudy's assets??

[njbill]

I haven’t heard that one about Rudy, but as a general rule a judgment debtor cannot be sent to jail simply for failing to pay a judgment. A judgment debtor has no obligation to voluntarily pay a judgment.

There are exceptions to that where the judgment debtor either refuses to respond to post judgment discovery about his assets or refuses to take action ordered by a court to take steps necessary to turn over assets. You see this type of thing in domestic cases from time to time. Husband hides assets overseas in jurisdictions beyond the reach of US process or international treaties. Wife gets a judgment and tries to collect. Husband refuses to say where his assets are. A judge gets fed up and holds the husband in contempt, putting him in jail until he says where his assets are. Or if the assets are unreachable by US process, a court could compel the husband to take the necessary steps to put the assets within reach of US process. If he fails to do that, he could be jailed for contempt.

Perhaps someone is suggesting that Rudy is doing something similar, that is, hiding his assets. Regardless of what Rudy is doing, I would be somewhat surprised if he got put in jail.

My guess is that Rudy is getting financial help from people who are sympathetic to him. If done the right way, it is difficult or impossible for a judgment creditor to reach funds of that nature.

I don’t think a final judgment will be entered against Rudy until the post trial motions have been resolved. Once the final judgment is entered, I believe the plaintiffs can begin to execute after 10 days. They will need to register their DC federal court judgment in other jurisdictions where they think Rudy has assets, such as New York. Registration is a very simple process. Rudy does not need to be given notice and he has no ability whatsoever to block it.

Rudy can stop the plaintiffs from executing on appeal if he posts a supercedeas bond. However, I’m pretty sure the bond needs to be in the amount of the full judgment. I don’t think he can block execution by posting a bond in a lesser amount. As I mentioned before, I loved it when my judgment debtor posted a bond because it insured I would get paid if I won the appeal and I wouldn’t have to chase after their assets. I’d be somewhat surprised if a friend of Rudy’s would be willing to help in putting up a bond, but that could depend on the amount of the ultimate final judgment.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Here is the 11th Circuit's decision, telling Mark Meadows to head on back to Georgia State Court. It's pretty interesting, and is written by one of the most conservative judges on the federal appellate courts and senior judge of the Court of Appeals, Alabaman William Pryor, Jr.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... 3/a2416224

As you will see, if you read this, the Court unanimously determines that Meadows's actions, as alleged in the criminal indictment and complaint, were not federal executive department functions. This augers badly for Trump's presidential immunity defenses, now being briefed in the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit (and dealt with during the 2:00 minute offense proposed by the Special Counsel to the SCOTUS). Hard to see how Meadows, in this respect -- toadying his way down to Georgia to find 11,700 votes for the GOP candidate, talking to State election officials about the election that occurred in their state -- is any different from Trump.

[Kismet]

Here is the 11th Circuit's decision, telling Mark Meadows to head on back to Georgia State Court. It's pretty interesting, and is written by one of the most conservative judges on the federal appellate courts and senior judge of the Court of Appeals, Alabaman William Pryor, Jr.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... 3/a2416224

As you will see, if you read this, the Court unanimously determines that Meadows's actions, as alleged in the criminal indictment and complaint, were not federal executive department functions. This augers badly for Trump's presidential immunity defenses, now being briefed in the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit (and dealt with during the 2:00 minute offense proposed by the Special Counsel to the SCOTUS). Hard to see how Meadows, in this respect -- toadying his way down to Georgia to find 11,700 votes for the GOP candidate, talking to State election officials about the election that occurred in their state -- is any different from Trump.

Also means that Orange Fatso isn't eligible for the move either.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Here is the 11th Circuit's decision, telling Mark Meadows to head on back to Georgia State Court. It's pretty interesting, and is written by one of the most conservative judges on the federal appellate courts and senior judge of the Court of Appeals, Alabaman William Pryor, Jr.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... 3/a2416224

As you will see, if you read this, the Court unanimously determines that Meadows's actions, as alleged in the criminal indictment and complaint, were not federal executive department functions. This augers badly for Trump's presidential immunity defenses, now being briefed in the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit (and dealt with during the 2:00 minute offense proposed by the Special Counsel to the SCOTUS). Hard to see how Meadows, in this respect -- toadying his way down to Georgia to find 11,700 votes for the GOP candidate, talking to State election officials about the election that occurred in their state -- is any different from Trump.

Also means that Orange Fatso isn't eligible for the move either.

That too; what I am saying is that this decision suggests that the immunity defense -- far more important to the Orange Moron -- is also unlikely to be available to Trump.

[Kismet]

Here is the 11th Circuit's decision, telling Mark Meadows to head on back to Georgia State Court. It's pretty interesting, and is written by one of the most conservative judges on the federal appellate courts and senior judge of the Court of Appeals, Alabaman William Pryor, Jr.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... 3/a2416224

As you will see, if you read this, the Court unanimously determines that Meadows's actions, as alleged in the criminal indictment and complaint, were not federal executive department functions. This augers badly for Trump's presidential immunity defenses, now being briefed in the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit (and dealt with during the 2:00 minute offense proposed by the Special Counsel to the SCOTUS). Hard to see how Meadows, in this respect -- toadying his way down to Georgia to find 11,700 votes for the GOP candidate, talking to State election officials about the election that occurred in their state -- is any different from Trump.

Also means that Orange Fatso isn't eligible for the move either.

That too; what I am saying is that this decision suggests that the immunity defense -- far more important to the Orange Moron -- is also unlikely to be available to Trump.

Going to need at least 5 votes on SCOTUS for that. Two from the group - Gorsuch, Coney-Barrett and Kavanaugh the most likely. Maybe even three.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Here is the 11th Circuit's decision, telling Mark Meadows to head on back to Georgia State Court. It's pretty interesting, and is written by one of the most conservative judges on the federal appellate courts and senior judge of the Court of Appeals, Alabaman William Pryor, Jr.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... 3/a2416224

As you will see, if you read this, the Court unanimously determines that Meadows's actions, as alleged in the criminal indictment and complaint, were not federal executive department functions. This augers badly for Trump's presidential immunity defenses, now being briefed in the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit (and dealt with during the 2:00 minute offense proposed by the Special Counsel to the SCOTUS). Hard to see how Meadows, in this respect -- toadying his way down to Georgia to find 11,700 votes for the GOP candidate, talking to State election officials about the election that occurred in their state -- is any different from Trump.

Also means that Orange Fatso isn't eligible for the move either.

That too; what I am saying is that this decision suggests that the immunity defense -- far more important to the Orange Moron -- is also unlikely to be available to Trump.

Going to need at least 5 votes on SCOTUS for that. Two from the group - Gorsuch, Coney-Barrett and Kavanaugh the most likely. Maybe even three.

Yes. But I have to believe that the policy implications of providing such a defense to candidate Trump will be enough to overcome the Alito/Thomas deference to their Masters. Providing immunity from criminal suit to an incumbent President who, as incumbent and a candidate for reelection, would be a literal carte blanche for the incumbent to bend the powers of the Presidency, his office and the functions of the Executive Branch to his need to be reelected.

Oh, and a postscript: Meadows's lawyers are much better than Trump's.

[njbill]

Agreed.

Thanks sc for posting the link to the decision. Very interesting. I think the part of the opinion that said the president and his chief of staff have no role in overseeing or enforcing state elections is compelling and hard to argue with. And a possible harbinger of how the Supreme Court will rule on the rather similar immunity defense Trump has raised.

I am somewhat confident the Supreme Court will rule against Trump on his blanket immunity defense. Perhaps the court at this stage will simply say a president does not have blanket immunity, but will leave to the lower courts and then a later Supreme Court decision whether in this particular instance, Trump‘s conduct was in the performance of his official duties and thus covered by immunity.

[NattyBohChamps04]

Yes. But I have to believe that the policy implications of providing such a defense to candidate Trump will be enough to overcome the Alito/Thomas deference to their Masters. Providing immunity from criminal suit to an incumbent President who, as incumbent and a candidate for reelection, would be a literal carte blanche for the incumbent to bend the powers of the Presidency, his office and the functions of the Executive Branch to his need to be reelected.

SCOTUS is 100% not keen on ceding power to either branch. Which this would do.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Agreed.

Thanks sc for posting the link to the decision. Very interesting. I think the part of the opinion that said the president and his chief of staff have no role in overseeing or enforcing state elections is compelling and hard to argue with. And a possible harbinger of how the Supreme Court will rule on the rather similar immunity defense Trump has raised.

I am somewhat confident the Supreme Court will rule against Trump on his blanket immunity defense. Perhaps the court at this stage will simply say a president does not have blanket immunity, but will leave to the lower courts and then a later Supreme Court decision whether in this particular instance, Trump‘s conduct was in the performance of his official duties and thus covered by immunity.

Agreed. It’s a motion to dismiss. I assume for criminal cases the standard is mostly the same as a civil case, and the court is reviewing the facts as pled in the indictment/complaint. Is that right? If so, I think the DC Circuit denies the motion on the basis intimated in the 11th Circuit’s decision on Meadows’s removal petition.