Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY.) warned Sunday there is a “risk” to not seizing former President Trump’s assets as he faces a looming deadline to post a bond in the $454 million judgment in his New York fraud case.

“I think that what we are dealing with politically is the much larger and much more grave and serious pressure of having this judgment against Donald Trump and him being in this degree of debt and the financial pressures that he is under and what he is subject to do in order to obtain those assets,” Ocasio-Cortez said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“I actually think that there is risk in not seizing these assets and the open window that exists in him trying to secure these funds through other means,” she said. “We’ve seen a lot of interesting transactions happening with Truth Social and other means. And there’s a very real risk of political corruption.”

The deadline for Trump to pay the staggering bond amount is Monday in the New York fraud case. If he fails to post a bond, he faces a risk of his assets being seized by New York Attorney General Letitia James — who he has continued to rail against in recent days.

  • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    124
    ·
    9 months ago

    If I were dealing with a single issue that he’s going through, I would not be able to get a security clearance.

    • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Your mistake was not running for president first. You can basically do what you want once you’re president, wipe your ass with the constitution, plan political assassinations, dream to your hearts content bcz being president in the U.S. means the laws are made up and they don’t matter, as long as you are or used to be president.

      • lettruthout@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, that’s something I’ve been wondering about… So Trump is arguing that Biden should be allowed to assassinate him?

        • baru@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          9 months ago

          So Trump is arguing that Biden should be allowed to assassinate him?

          Obviously not as that would conflict with: rules for thee but not for me

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Untrue. You just have to be elected president. If we remove that, there’s no way he would get security clearance either.

  • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    9 months ago

    The risk of letting trump get away for so long led us to this BS today.

    The risk of not punishing Jan 6 terrorists with the abu ghraib treatment (which as disgusting as it is) is what led to literal Nazis walking around proudly with flags.

  • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Cab drivers in New York City are now referring to Trump Tower as The Tish Mahal. The AG will handle this by Friday,

    • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      9 months ago

      She’s saying that not seizing his property,and letting him acquire the funds through alternative means to pay, puts him at risk of being bought. That makes him more of a security risk to the country just so he can keep his assets.

      • blazera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        She’s saying that not seizing his property

        again, why is this being talked about like an option? He’s been ruled to pay, he hasn’t paid by the deadline, by law assets must be seized to cover it.

        • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Because the bond is not for his property, it is for 464m in cash. They are saying how he gets the money will dictate if he’s in someone’s pocket.

            • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              He can get a loan for the bond. Legally. He could get a loan “from a friend”, legally, but then he might be in debt with that potential bad actor. If he pays with a loan then they can’t go after his property because he paid in full. That’s just how it works.

                • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Currently, he hasn’t done anything but he was trying to get a loan. This article is talking about how they should take his assets instead of letting him get a loan, because if he owes someone else half a billion dollars, he’ll be in their pocket to do as they ask.

    • rigatti@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think she’s just trying to put it in real terms. Debt is something that is looked at for government security clearances for exactly this reason. I can’t imagine anyone with $454 million in debt getting any sort of clearance.