ex-President Trump

but you can if you appeal a civil sentence in which you were found to have done something that you deny having done, and you insist on not having done it?

Incorrect. You are free to file an appeal, and you cannot be held liable for defamation for asserting the grounds for your appeal in court papers. I guess that a court might conclude that absolute immunity didn't attach if a litigant was blatantly abusing the court process to make what would otherwise be blatantly defamatory statements, but I assume that isn't the scenario you are contemplating.

If that's all he did then there would be no problem. But he's going down the same road as before calling her crazy.

ok so chilrob was inventing stuff

I assume chillrob was probably confusing the court orders during the trial, which Trump did violate multiple times, with what is allowed now the trial is concluded. It's legal for Trump make these statements again now but probably not a great idea to continue making the exact same statements that have been found to be defamatory even if that is the basis of the appeal.

Incidentally I'm not quite sure how this appeal works, since the whole point of this most recent trial was that the previous judgement that found Trump did sexually assault Carroll was to be treated as fact and this trial was to determine whether the denials were defamatory and what damages to apply if so. I don't know how the defence of the statements being true works under those circumstances.

Where did chillrob say that Trump would be exposing himself to further defamation claims if he filed an appeal?

He linked his comment with the appeal existing and said they violate court rules .

In the comments trump just reiterates that he didn't sexually assault her and so she is lying

States along the coast tend to have a higher gdp per capita than landlocked states. The same could be said about countries in Africa. Maybe it has something to do with historical being on water was good for an economy or the fact that living in a city/state that good weather and beautiful beaches is preferable to bad weather and no beaches.

Why leads you to think trickle down doesn’t work?

Why indeed

Lotta red coastline

45 years of data !
What makes u think it works ?

To me when real wages over 40 years stagnate , it means the profits do not trickle down .

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/...

That’s what you mean when you speak of trickle down economy right ?
I think many times I heard you say the great thing about capitalism is more profits companies makes , better wages employees gets right ?

Expecting bahbah to concede defeat at any moment, folks. Defy der führer!

Isn't calling her a liar what he just got fined over $80 million for doing?

I didn't say anything about the appeal though; I meant him saying bad things about her violated the court orders, though I may have been incorrect about that.

As someone said a few posts up, I was remembering him being ordered by the court to stop talking about the whole thing, which of course he never obeyed. I didn't realize the court order was no longer in place, but it still takes a pretty dense person to do the same thing that he was just given a huge fine for doing.
And I do think he should be jailed immediately, and kept there until he pays the judgement. If I were charged a fine for something, refused to pay it, and then kept doing the same thing over and over, I think I would be put in jail (and would deserve it). I don't know why he should even be allowed to appeal this. How long will it take to decide on the appeal? If I get convicted of something I'm not going to be allowed to just appeal the decision for the rest of my life.

While it's not good that the victim has to wait longer to receive the damages owed, Trump has had to post a bond covering the judgement plus interest (~$92million) in order to file the appeal. It does feel a bit weird that he can keep doing exactly what he was just found guilty of without any further repercussions while the appeal happens but since it is the basis of the appeal there is some logic behind it being allowed. It seems like a not very clever thing to do though if he wants a more sympathetic judge/jury for the appeal.

The last I had heard he was attempting to appeal the judgment without posting the bond, even though it was normally required. But maybe he did post it in the last week or so.

I also heard that he had to post bond to appeal the larger bank fraud judgement, and that he did not have access to that much cash. If that hasn't yet been posted how long does he have, and what are the consequences for not paying?

For someone with his history and reputation of not paying his bills, I don't know how the court system just trusts him to pay all these judgements. I don't know all the law behind it but I know average people aren't allowed to get away with this kind of thing without being jailed and/or having their property seized.

the fraud case was like a week or two after the Carroll case so he still has some time to post the bond (it's a month since the verdict iirc).

if he doesn't post the bond, the state can start seizing trump company assets.

He was trying to appeal without paying/delaying paying the full bond but it was denied by the judge, in part because he waited almost a month before asking. He posted the full bond to appeal the defamation case on Friday.

The fraud judgement requires a bond of ~$500million in order to appeal and that's due by 25th March. If he hasn't paid or posted bond for the appeal by then then, as Luciom says, the state has the option to start seizing and selling off assets.

Trump continuing his embrace of autocrats.

Saying wages haven't kept up with inflation over a 40 year period isn't proof that trickle down doesn't work. You need to prove that over the last 40 years we were using trickle down and show what wages (and other economic indicators) would have done without trickle down.

Lol trickle down. CEOs are earning 350x the average salary in 2022 vs 20x in 1965. More like flood up.

Wages grew much more than inflation in the last 40 years in the USA lol

Saying CEO salaries grew way faster than other employee salaries over a 40 year period isn't proof that trickle down doesn't work. You need to prove that over the last 40 years we were using trickle down and show what CEO salaries grew way faster than other employee salaries (and other economic indicators) would have done without trickle down.

Sorry to beat the same drum again, but you made the same mistake montreal did.

Put in another way, did we really use trickle down for last 40 years if we had the highest corporate taxes in the developed world for most of that period?

"In fact, by almost every measure, the U.S. has one of the most progressive systems of taxation in the world, in which high-income people pay the highest tax rates."

"Economist William McBride found that “nearly every empirical study of taxes and economic growth published in a peer-reviewed academic journal finds that tax increases harm economic growth.”

https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentar...

By your standard, it's impossible to prove that any economic theory doesn't work, since we can't go back in time and un-implement it. "The results were dogshit? Well you can't *prove* they would otherwise have been better." Lol blahblah Michael as usual.

That's called the Lucas critique ye.

You can try to prove some stuff empirically when you have pseudo-experiments but that's about it.

Seems like common sense to me. Blahblah either pretends to be or actually is so dumb as to not actually get that.