Connect with us


$83 million in damages put Trump in financial distress



$83 million in damages put Trump in financial distress
  1. Homepage
  2. Policy

Donald Trump should pay American writer E. Jane Carroll received compensation of $83 million. This could destroy the former US president.

Update from January 27 at 3:05 p.m.: Nikki Haley is using the ruling in her campaign as a Republican presidential candidate: “Donald Trump wants to be the presumptive Republican nominee and we are talking about $83 million in damages,” Haley wrote on the online platform X, formerly Twitter. “America can do better than Donald Trump and Joe Biden.”

Updated from January 27 at 2 p.m.: Not only Trump himself, but also supporters of the former president and his Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement expressed their anger on social media over the ruling in Trump's trial against Carroll in New York.

“President Trump has been denied a fair trial in New York, where judges are now political operatives instead of dispensing justice,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican and ardent Trump ally, wrote on X (formerly Twitter) after the ruling.

Update from January 27 at 10:50 a.m.: Meanwhile, E. Jane Carroll hailed the ruling against Donald Trump as “a great victory for every woman who stands up when she is pushed down and a great defeat for every tyrant who has tried to keep women down.”

In a first trial last year, Trump was ordered to pay $5 million in compensatory damages for sexual assault and defamation of the journalist. Carroll has sued Trump twice, which is why there were two lawsuits.

READ  Vladimir Putin visits Mariupol and annexed Crimea
In this courtroom diagram, attorney Alina Haba points to her client, former President Donald Trump, as she makes her closing argument to the jury. © Elizabeth Williams/DPA

The 80-year-old accuses Trump of raping her in a dressing room at luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman in New York in 1996. The Elle magazine columnist first made her accusations publicly in 2019, when Trump was president. The Republican then accused Carroll of lying and said she was not „his type.”

Trump v. Carroll trial in New York: Former president speaks of 'witch hunt'

Update from January 27 at 9:00 AM: The ruling against Donald Trump was celebrated by the former president's opponents, analyzed by legal experts and sharply criticized by the presumptive 2024 Republican nominee for the White House and his loyal supporters.

Trump called the ruling “absolutely ridiculous” and claimed it was part of Joe Biden’s “witch hunt” against “me and the Republican Party” — even though the matter is a private lawsuit against Trump.

From his plane, while Carroll's lawyers were still speaking, Trump wrote on his Social Truth platform: “Absolutely ridiculous!” I strongly disagree with both rulings and will appeal Biden's witch hunt against me and the Republican Party. Our legal system is out of control and being used as a political weapon. They have taken away all our First Amendment rights. This is not America!

Trump's trial in New York: „A great victory for every woman”

Update from January 27, 5:15 a.m.: The jury of seven men and two women in a New York court took about two hours to reach their decision: the verdict said that Donald Trump acted „maliciously” with his comments about Carroll German News Agency model.

READ  Ukrainian Soldiers Storm Dnipro - Huge Losses For Russia's Secret Data

Carroll's lawyers argued that only a large sum of money could prevent Trump from continuing to verbally attack the author. “This is a great victory for every woman who stands up when pressured, and a great defeat for every bully who tried to keep women down,” Carroll said after the decision was announced. Trump called the ruling „absolutely ridiculous” on the online platform Truth Social, which he co-founded. His lawyer, Alina Haba, announced that she would appeal the ruling.

Trump trial in New York: The former president disrupts the trial

Before the second trial began, Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled that Trump's subsequent comments were defamatory. The jury now only had to decide how much compensation Trump should pay. The $83.3 million consists of $7.3 million in compensatory damages, $11 million in damages for the Author Reputation Repair Program, and $65 million in so-called punitive damages, which will punish the convict and deter him from future behavior. He should.

Trump appeared in person several times at the second trial – unlike the first, which he did not even attend – and was alarmingly noted by the many pending opinions, which is why the judge threatened to disqualify him in the meantime. During closing arguments on Friday, Trump unexpectedly temporarily left the room without first asking the judge for permission. Trump's Hapa attorney also clashed repeatedly with Judge Kaplan.

Trump must pay compensation: $83.3 million

The first report: NEW YORK – Former US President Donald Trump has been ordered to pay an additional $83.3 million (about 77 million euros) in damages in a second defamation trial in New York. This is what the jury decided on Friday, as the American media reported unanimously. American author E. Jean Carroll sued again.

READ  Researchers reactivate the 50,000-year-old 'zombie virus'

This is the second civil lawsuit filed by American writer E. Jean Carroll (80 years old) against Trump. The amount is several times higher than the amount requested by Carroll, which was more than ten million dollars.

At the end of the first trial in May, a New York jury found that it was proven that Trump attacked Carroll in a luxury New York store in 1996, sexually assaulted him and later defamed him. The jury then awarded the writer compensation in the amount of five million dollars (about 4.65 million euros).

Before the second trial began, Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled that Trump's subsequent comments were defamatory. The jury now only had to decide how much compensation Trump should pay.

How can 83 million bring down billionaire Trump?

Forbes magazine estimates Trump's wealth at about $2.6 billion, yet compensation amounting to „only” $83 million could destroy him. This is because the vast majority of Trump's wealth consists of real estate. The former president appears to have only a very reasonable amount of liquid assets. The situation has been made worse for Trump by two other legal factors.

First of all, there is the New York Attorney General's Office, which considers Trump's estates to be significantly overvalued. Among other things, Trump is said to have obtained better loan terms from banks. Therefore, New York Attorney General Letitia James accused Trump of fraud in another case. As part of this ongoing case, prosecutors have frozen all of the properties in question in New York. So Trump couldn't sell it to get the $83 million he now has to pay E. Jane Carroll.

Our justice system is out of control and being used as a political weapon. […] This is not America!

Trump wants to appeal this defamation ruling, as he announced on his private social network Truth Social immediately after the ruling was announced: “Totally ridiculous!” “I strongly disagree with both rulings and will object to this witch hunt that Biden is waging against me and the Republican Party.” But this may be very difficult for Trump, because in New York State the required amount of damages must be deposited in an escrow account in order to file an appeal. So, Trump can only appeal if he has $83 million in liquid assets — and this has been known to be a problem for him.

Thus, the ruling in the libel trial against Jean Carroll may have more far-reaching consequences for Trump than it might seem at first glance.

Trump wants to run for president

Trump, 77 years old, is considered the most promising candidate for Republicans in the presidential elections scheduled for next November. However, he currently has to deal with the courts on many different issues. Trump often uses court dates as a type of campaign event. (Scheil/DPA/AFP)

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Twój adres e-mail nie zostanie opublikowany. Wymagane pola są oznaczone *


Russia escalates border conflict – migrants 'like pawns'



Russia escalates border conflict – migrants 'like pawns'

In the border region with Finland, Russia uses migrants as a means of pressure to weaken the cohesion of the European Union. Finland responds with countermeasures.

Finland has been part of NATO since April 2023, abandoning its decades-old neutrality. Since then, tensions have increased with neighboring Russia. In addition to canceling the bilateral border agreement, Russian President Vladimir Putin also announced the transfer of troops to the border area with Finland. This is also evident in this year's annual report issued by the Estonian government, which shows that Russia is planning to deploy new units near the Finnish border.

Finland has responded to Russian measures by building a border fence up to 200 kilometers long – not least to combat illegal immigration in the border area allegedly controlled by Russia. The Frankfurter Rundschau reports on this matter.

As Finnish Interior Minister Mari Rantanen revealed in a press conference on Tuesday, the Finnish government has information that “thousands of people are waiting on the Russian side to reach Finland.” According to Rantanen, it can be assumed that more migrants will try to cross the border once temperatures rise in the spring.



The Finnish border with Russia is currently closed. According to the conservative Finnish government, this will not change until May this year after the number of migrants at the border rose rapidly at the end of 2023. According to the Finnish Border Authority, about 1,300 migrants from countries such as Yemen, Somalia and Syria tried to reach Finland via Russia between August and December 2023. Previously, only one asylum seeker applied for asylum per day on average.

Finland-Russia is Belarus-Poland

According to Armida van Rij of think tank Chatham House, Russia's strategy of using controlled migration as a means of pressure and thus undermining the cohesion of Western countries is a so-called gray zone tactic. According to van Rij, such tactics involve measures that go beyond purely political pressure, but do not clearly constitute an act of aggression. It is therefore difficult to evaluate such measures under international law.

The issue of migration is particularly ripe for dividing EU member states, as the issue is particularly polarizing within the Union. According to Van Rij, the migrants will be used “like pawns” to advance Russian interests.

Between 2021 and 2022, Belarusian Governor Alexander Lukashenko deliberately deployed migrants to the border region with Poland in order to pressure the European Union and force an end to sanctions against Belarus – but to no avail.

Continue Reading


“Put obstacles in our way”: Burbuk plane stuck in Rio de Janeiro



“Put obstacles in our way”: Burbuk plane stuck in Rio de Janeiro

„Put obstacles in our way”
Birbok plane stuck in Rio de Janeiro

Listen to the material

This audio version was created artificially. More information | Send your opinion

Foreign Minister Baerbock was praising the G20 as an engine for reform in international relations, when suddenly her plane got stuck in Rio de Janeiro. The captain suspects that “the Brazilians are putting obstacles in our way.” This is not the first accident that the green politician has been exposed to.

Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock once again suffered a delay in one of her trips abroad. The Green politician originally wanted to leave for New York at around 5:30pm (CET) from the G20 foreign ministers meeting in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Initially there was a waiting time because the government's Airbus A350-900 still had to be refueled. After completing refueling at approximately 6:30 p.m., the flight commander had to continue to postpone the minister. “Looks like the worm is there today,” the captain said. “We are currently trying to get permission to start the flight to New York. But the Brazilians are putting obstacles in our way today, one way or another.” At the moment, it appears that the departure permit will not be issued for another 30 to 40 minutes at the earliest. „I can't tell you why. In 40 years of flying service, I've never encountered anything like this. I'm sorry.”

At approximately 7 p.m., the plane took off on a nine-hour flight to New York. Baerbock wants to speak there on Friday, among other things, at the UN General Assembly and UN Security Council meetings on the second anniversary of the Russian attack on Ukraine.

Lots of experience dealing with disrupted flights

Only in January did Baerbock, often affected by problems on commercial flights, have to make an unplanned layover on a trip to East Africa. Due to the lack of a flight permit for Eritrea, their plane had to return en route from Berlin to Djibouti in East Africa and land in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Baerbock had previously described the G20 round as a “reform engine” within international institutions such as the United Nations. “If we want to meet the complex challenges of the 21st century, our multilateral institutions must not remain stuck in the last century,” the Green politician said in a discussion among G20 foreign ministers on reforms of international political organizations and the international financial architecture. “I believe that the G20 can and must play a decisive role in this reform process.”

READ  Six dead in school shooting - gunman suffering from 'mental disorder'.
Continue Reading


Martin Sonneborn in an interview about Assange: “It borders on sabotage”



Martin Sonneborn in an interview about Assange: “It borders on sabotage”
  1. Homepage
  2. Policy

He presses

Martin Sonneborn speaks in an interview about Julian Assange's hearing. © Alberto Pizzali/Philip von Dittfurth/DPA

The Supreme Court in London decides to extradite Julian Assange to the United States. European Parliamentarian Martin Sonneborn speaks about the issue in an interview.

Mr Sonneborn, you are attending Julian Assange's extradition hearing in London. How has it gone so far?

Sonneborn: Actually very good. There were two submissions that were brilliantly presented by Assange's lawyers. I was in the courtroom and understood almost nothing.

There were reports that the technology left a lot to be desired.

What the British are doing here amounts to sabotage. The world's most important trial over freedom of the press – and it's taking place in the smallest courtroom you can find in the Supreme Court. The court blocked granting internet access outside of England and Wales – so people from the USA, Australia and the EU were unable to connect. Hence there is only room for twenty journalists at the exhibition. With live streaming, postage stamp-sized heads appear on the screen, often with no discernible sound for the first half. We managed to sneak into the hall, and MP Sevim Dagdelen was sitting with the Assange family and he let us in. Germans abroad must band together.

Sonneborn on Assange: “An attempt to silence critical journalism”

Assange case

The United States charges Julian Assange The charges of espionage and conspiracy threaten his personal safety and freedom of the press. A hearing on Assange's extradition to the United States was held at the High Court in London on February 20-21. This initially ended without resolution. If extradited, Assange could face up to 175 years in prison.

Frankfurter Rundschau The case of Julian Assange is accompanied by analyses, commentaries and interviews. They highlight the background and provide an overview of events in London. We have compiled the texts into our electronic file on Assange.

What did Assange's lawyers say?

All the arguments are on his side – I have shown once again how crazy it is to accuse a propagandist of publishing true information, including US war crimes. The whole thing is an attempt to criminalize and silence critical journalism. Assange's information was available in Spiegel, The Guardian, and The New York Times.

Assange is accused of espionage. what do you think?

Even if the espionage charge was deemed justified, he would not be allowed to be extradited because that would violate the bilateral extradition treaty between the United States and Great Britain, which includes an explicit ban on political crimes. Espionage is considered a political crime under British law.

An Australian citizen is set to receive a 175-year prison sentence in the USA for exposing US war crimes. I once recommended to my colleagues in the European Union Parliament to show the film „Collateral Murder” on YouTube in one of my speeches. American soldiers can be seen shooting indiscriminately at civilians, children and journalists from a helicopter in Baghdad. The people who committed these war crimes will not be tried. And the man who announced this had been rotting in six-square-meter cells for five years.

READ  The "Most Important Tool" in the US: The FBI Smashes Russia's Cyber-espionage Tool

Extradition Hearing – Concern about Assange is great

Julian Assange himself was not present on Tuesday. They said he was sick. What do you know about his condition?

There is great concern for him here. He has been detained in a high-security prison for five years, without any valid legal basis. Belmarsh, to make this more descriptive, is the prison where the supervillains in the James Bond films are imprisoned. British food in solitary confinement, with malnutrition, is often an additional torture, as I have just discovered again in London.

At least he was still connected to the last trial, right?

Yes, there was a camera in the cell he was in. Assange suffered a minor stroke during the trial. It must be terrible when you're sitting there listening to lawyers negotiating your fate with other lawyers, and you can't even express yourself. On Tuesday, a luxury cell was prepared for him in the courtroom: a wire cage.

Wire cage?

Yes, you have to imagine it a little like the old Robin Hood movies. A late British Gothic room in which a few light bulbs, some broken microphones and some decorated curtains are hung in front of the high windows. On the front left was a few square metres, perhaps larger than his cell, which was surrounded by huge black bars. This is where Assange was supposed to sit.

The petitions claimed that Assange was accused of a political crime and that Britain was not allowed to extradite him because of a related treaty with the United States. What to expect for day two?

On Wednesday, the American side filed its charges under the Espionage Act, a law dating back to World War I. In fact, I don't see what would be great in terms of content. However, we know of course that the final decision will be made in Washington whether to halt this process or continue it until the bitter end.

'It's not enough': Sonneborn on lack of support for Assange

Do you have the impression that the number of Assange supporters has decreased? In Germany, many Green leaders have remained virtually silent. What does the situation look like in the European Parliament?

I think there are three MEPs here. This is very little. I saw Andrzej Honko and Sevim Dagdelen from the Bundestag and Jeremy Corbyn from the Labor Party. It is very unfortunate that more politicians are not defending Assange. It's about absolute basic rights, and it's about these Western values ​​that we always vocalize when it suits us. Unfortunately, both Baerbock and Habeck, who had publicly called for Assange's release before the government took office, promptly forgot their demands in their offices. Fortunately, there were a relatively large number of people on the streets of London.

READ  Annalina Berbock: "There will be hope!" The foreign minister sneered at the bad English

It was previously said that Julian Assange could be extradited to the United States within a few days after the hearing. How do you rate that?

So, based on everything I've heard, I think Democrats don't want to have a third contentious issue before the presidential election in addition to the problem areas of Ukraine and the Middle East. I think it will not be delivered at the moment. Assange may remain detained in his cell until the US elections.

Supporters demand freedom for Julian Assange. But if he is not extradited to the US after the hearing, but remains imprisoned in Belmarsh, it will only be a victory. On what legal basis can he continue to be detained?

The court may postpone its pending decision indefinitely. Assange has hardly any contact with his family. He has two young children and a wife. This is very stressful for everyone. An example is made here.

French texts on the Assange case (selection)

– Julian Assange in Portrait: One Man, Many Faces
Comment: The Assange case is a campaign against freedom of the press
– Article: Art, Protest, and the Julian Assange Case
– The United States of America and the Assange case: the dark side of power
– Analysis: What remains of WikiLeaks?
– Retrospective article: For Julian Assange, it's all about the now
– Support: Protests in front of the magnificent London Palace
– Politics: In the Assange case, the Greens were clearly silent

-Stella Assange: “Julian could be on a plane to the United States the day after the hearing.”
-Jeremy Corbyn: 'The media is very disappointing'

Assange case: Every whistleblower will 'think three times' in the future

What do you mean?

In the future, all whistleblowers will think three times whether they really want to expose government crimes. But I think everyone understands that at this point, so: release Assange! There is a public interest in uncovering Secret Service and military crimes.

We have published a 32-page booklet on the case, which can be downloaded from my home page. This is the only semi-official document from the EU Parliament in which Assange's name is mentioned. Otherwise, the major parties will work to distance him from even the smallest mention on any sub-point, even in the least important decisions. In our documentary, which is unfortunately not at all satirical, and even a bit controversial at times when the story becomes too tiresome, it becomes clear that Mike “Fatty” Pompeo is waging a vendetta against him.

READ  Six dead in school shooting - gunman suffering from 'mental disorder'.

Mike Pompeo, former Secretary of State and former CIA Director?

Yes. Assange has posted via WikiLeaks that the CIA not only conducts mass surveillance and espionage on governments and citizens around the world, but also – and this is against US law – on its own American citizens. It is capable of invading all computers and even taking over Internet-connected home appliances, even steering your car or turning your refrigerator into a well-stocked listening device. Pompeo took this personally, and the CIA then hatched a plan to kidnap and kill Assange. Approved by the White House. How do you want to extradite a person to a country that was planning to kill him?

I said that at the European Union level they avoid mentioning Assange's name. what is the reason?

I think that at the moment under Ms. von der Leyen's leadership, we are very close to the United States and NATO. This is anti-European and contrary to the Treaty. The Assange case is important to the highest levels of government in the United States; Every US president has pursued him, from Obama to Trump to Biden.

“There are two reasons”: Sonneborn is running for the EU Parliament again

Another question about your renewed candidacy for membership in the European Union Parliament. What motivates you to do this – the final part of idealism?

There are two reasons why we are competing again. The first is: We don't want to get kicked out the door. The CDU and SPD have passed an electoral law reform that violates the constitution and aims to keep us out of parliament using a threshold clause. The real accusation: very bad jokes and too much transparency. We are currently conducting member dispute procedures, and the Federal Constitutional Court recently informed President Steinmeier that he should not prepare the new electoral law at this time. Smiling

I think the accusation of transparency is more serious, right?

Exactly, and this is also the second reason: we can create transparency. Your colleagues here in Brussels are not that critical. But in the European Union we are moving more and more towards surveillance, extra-treaty militarization, and discrimination of opinions. I would like to continue to make all of these things transparent.

Interview: Christine is grateful

Continue Reading